1. SYED MOHAMMAD HAIQAL BIN SYED MOHAMMAD ZAMRI 2. WAN NOR AZHAR BIN WAN MUHAMAD

1. SYED MOHAMMAD HAIQAL BIN SYED MOHAMMAD ZAMRI 2. WAN NOR AZHAR BIN WAN MUHAMAD

The High Court held the trial judge did not err: immediate and in‑court identifications were reliable despite imperfections in any parade; non‑production of named witnesses did not constitute suppression under s114(g); discrepancies in peripheral details did not create reasonable doubt on core elements of robbery; the prosecution adduced sufficient evidence to establish guilt under ss 395 and 397 and the imposed sentence was not excessive, therefore appeal dismissed and conviction and sentence affirmed.

Citation
DA42S-11-04/2018 & DA42S-12-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
1st Appellant: Syed Mohammad Haiqal bin Syed Mohammad Zamri; 2nd Appellant: Wan Nor Azhar bin Wan Muhamad; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Case Number
DA42S-11-04/2018 & DA42S-12-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Robbery Under Ss 395 and 397 Penal Code / High Court Hearing on Appeal From Sessions Court Conviction
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Robbery (s 395, S 397), Identification Parade/kawad Cam, Non‑production of Witnesses and S 114(g) Inference, Assessment of Witness Credibility, Recovery of Exhibits, Sentence Review
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Appellate Review Robbery (s 395, S 397) Identification Parade/kawad Cam Non‑production of Witnesses and S 114(g) Inference Assessment of Witness Credibility Recovery of Exhibits +1 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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Syed Mohammad Haiqal bin Syed Mohammad Zamri

1st Appellant

Wan Nor Azhar bin Wan Muhamad

2nd Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Robbery Under Ss 395 and 397 Penal Code / High Court Hearing on Appeal From Sessions Court Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether identification evidence was tainted by defective identification parade
  2. 2 Whether non‑production of witnesses (Ayas and Rahim) permits an adverse inference under s114(g) Evidence Act
  3. 3 Whether discrepancies in number of perpetrators and descriptions of weapons undermine the prosecution case

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the trial judge did not err: immediate and in‑court identifications were reliable despite imperfections in any parade; non‑production of named witnesses did not constitute suppression under s114(g); discrepancies in peripheral details did not create reasonable doubt on core elements of robbery; the prosecution adduced sufficient evidence to establish guilt under ss 395 and 397 and the imposed sentence was not excessive, therefore appeal dismissed and conviction and sentence affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions under s 395 read with s 397 Kanun Keseksaan and sentences of 11 years' imprisonment and 4 strokes of the cane for each appellant upheld