[ ] WAN FATIHAH BINTI NADZRIN

[ ] WAN FATIHAH BINTI NADZRIN

The High Court held the Sessions Court erred in granting an acquittal and discharge because the prosecution had demonstrated good grounds and a clear intention to continue prosecution after further investigation (notably with LAZADA and telecommunication companies) and delays were substantially attributable to COVID‑19 restrictions and judicial case management factors; accordingly the A&D was set aside and replaced with a DNAA on all 34 charges.

Citation
AA-42LB-7-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Pendakwa Raya; Respondent: Wan Fatihah binti Nadzrin
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 July 2022
Case Number
AA-42LB-7-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / High Court Decision on Appeal From Sessions Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Discharge Under Section 254 Criminal Procedure Code (dnaa Vs Acquittal), Prosecutorial Discretion, Breach of Trust (section 408 Penal Code), Appellate Review of Factual Findings
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Constitutional Law Discharge Under Section 254 Criminal Procedure Code (dnaa Vs Acquittal) Prosecutorial Discretion Breach of Trust (section 408 Penal Code) Appellate Review of Factual Findings

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Appellant

Wan Fatihah binti Nadzrin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / High Court Decision on Appeal From Sessions Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Court erred in granting acquittal and discharge instead of discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) under section 254 CPC
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution demonstrated good grounds and intention to continue prosecution after further investigation
  3. 3 Whether appellate court should disturb trial judge's exercise of discretion given factual findings and delays

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court held the Sessions Court erred in granting an acquittal and discharge because the prosecution had demonstrated good grounds and a clear intention to continue prosecution after further investigation (notably with LAZADA and telecommunication companies) and delays were substantially attributable to COVID‑19 restrictions and judicial case management factors; accordingly the A&D was set aside and replaced with a DNAA on all 34 charges.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Appeal by Pendakwa Raya allowed
  • Order of acquittal and discharge (A&D) made by the Sessions Court set aside