Norul Ezwan Bin Nasir

Norul Ezwan Bin Nasir

Prima facie case was established as determined by the appellate High Court order calling the accused to defend; the statutory presumption under s.50(1) ASPRM applied once prosecution proved the request/receipt of RM100 (marked money and recorded conversation); the accused failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities given inconsistent, uncorroborated denials and conduct evidence (phone records, trapping and recovery of marked money); therefore conviction and sentence by the Sessions Court were upheld.

Citation
WA-42(R)(A)-2-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Perayu / Accused: Norul Ezwan bin Nasir; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
R
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 May 2023
Case Number
WA-42(R)(A)-2-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (bribery) / Judgment on Appeal After Trial and Conviction (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Bribery, Statutory Presumption Under S.50(1) ASPRM 2009, Prima Facie, Rebuttal on Balance of Probabilities, Relevance (evidence Act Ss.7 & 8), Sentencing and Public Interest
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑corruption Law Evidence Law Bribery Statutory Presumption Under S.50(1) ASPRM 2009 Prima Facie Rebuttal on Balance of Probabilities Relevance (evidence Act Ss.7 & 8) +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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Norul Ezwan bin Nasir

Perayu / Accused

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (bribery) / Judgment on Appeal After Trial and Conviction (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court was bound by the High Court order to call the accused to enter defence
  2. 2 Whether the accused rebutted the statutory presumption under Section 50(1) ASPRM 2009 on the balance of probabilities
  3. 3 Whether the defence evidence was sufficient to raise reasonable doubt or to negate the statutory presumption

Ratio Decidendi

Prima facie case was established as determined by the appellate High Court order calling the accused to defend; the statutory presumption under s.50(1) ASPRM applied once prosecution proved the request/receipt of RM100 (marked money and recorded conversation); the accused failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities given inconsistent, uncorroborated denials and conduct evidence (phone records, trapping and recovery of marked money); therefore conviction and sentence by the Sessions Court were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions under s.16(a)(B) and s.17(a) ASPRM 2009 affirmed