PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR RAMAN A/L PERIASAMY

PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR RAMAN A/L PERIASAMY

Maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence exposed material, unaddressed contradictions and investigative deficiencies that fatally undermined credibility and reliability of key prosecution witnesses including the child witness; the child’s evidence was not 'unusually convincing' nor sufficiently corroborated and prosecution’s failures (late sketch plan disclosure, failure to seize impugned item, inadequate lighting inquiry) justified adverse inference and destroyed any prima facie case under s.180 CPC — therefore accused must be acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence.

Citation
BK – S2 – 62JSK – 12 – 05 -2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Raman a/l Periasamy
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 January 2022
Case Number
BK – S2 – 62JSK – 12 – 05 -2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal – Sexual Offence Against Child / End of Prosecution Case (s.180 Cpc) — Accused Acquitted and Discharged Without Being Called to Enter Defence
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged at the end of the prosecution case (not called to enter defence)
Legal Topics
Non Physical Sexual Assault, Prima Facie Evaluation, Child Witness Evidence, Contradictory Evidence, Adverse Inference, Investigative Duties, Defective Charge
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Child Protection Evidence Law Non Physical Sexual Assault Prima Facie Evaluation Child Witness Evidence Contradictory Evidence +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Raman a/l Periasamy

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal – Sexual Offence Against Child / End of Prosecution Case (s.180 Cpc) — Accused Acquitted and Discharged Without Being Called to Enter Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution made out a prima facie case under s.180 CPC
  2. 2 Materiality of contradictions in prosecution witnesses' evidence
  3. 3 Whether child witness evidence was 'unusually convincing' or corroborated under s.18 Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017

Ratio Decidendi

Maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence exposed material, unaddressed contradictions and investigative deficiencies that fatally undermined credibility and reliability of key prosecution witnesses including the child witness; the child’s evidence was not 'unusually convincing' nor sufficiently corroborated and prosecution’s failures (late sketch plan disclosure, failure to seize impugned item, inadequate lighting inquiry) justified adverse inference and destroyed any prima facie case under s.180 CPC — therefore accused must be acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged at the end of the prosecution case (not called to enter defence)

Orders

  • Accused Raman a/l Periasamy acquitted and discharged under s.180 CPC