[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] XXXX

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] XXXX

The High Court held that proceedings under the Child Act 2001 must adhere to statutory procedures: the probation/akhlak report and Court Advisers' opinions are material and must be considered and recorded; Advisers may advise but must not usurp their role by questioning the child; failure to follow s.90 and related provisions may vitiate orders. In this matter the Public Prosecutor withdrew the appeal and the appeal was cancelled.

Citation
CB-41H-22-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Pendakwa Raya; Respondent: MFM; Respondent: MAEZ; Respondent: MFAA; Respondent: MAHR; Respondent: MAZB
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 July 2023
Case Number
CB-41H-22-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (child Offenders) / Appeal Withdrawn by the Public Prosecutor
Outcome
Appeal withdrawn by the Public Prosecutor and cancelled
Legal Topics
Probation Orders, Role of Court Advisers in Children's Proceedings, Use of Probation/behaviour Reports, Sentencing Mitigation for Child Offenders, Public Interest in Sentencing
Source Language
Malay/English
Child Law Criminal Law Sexual Offences Procedural Law Probation Orders Role of Court Advisers in Children's Proceedings Use of Probation/behaviour Reports Sentencing Mitigation for Child Offenders +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Appellant

MFM

Respondent

MAEZ

Respondent

MFAA

Respondent

MAHR

Respondent

MAZB

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (child Offenders) / Appeal Withdrawn by the Public Prosecutor

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the magistrate erred in granting probation orders under s.91(1)(b) Child Act 2001 based on the probation (akhlak) report
  2. 2 Proper role and limits of Court Advisers under s.11 and s.90 of the Child Act 2001
  3. 3 Whether the magistrate adequately considered seriousness of sexual offences and public interest

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held that proceedings under the Child Act 2001 must adhere to statutory procedures: the probation/akhlak report and Court Advisers' opinions are material and must be considered and recorded; Advisers may advise but must not usurp their role by questioning the child; failure to follow s.90 and related provisions may vitiate orders. In this matter the Public Prosecutor withdrew the appeal and the appeal was cancelled.

Court Disposition

Appeal withdrawn by the Public Prosecutor and cancelled

Orders

  • Appeal withdrawn/cancelled
  • No alteration of the magistrate's orders made by this court due to withdrawal