NUR MUHD RUSYDI BIN ABDUL RAMAN

NUR MUHD RUSYDI BIN ABDUL RAMAN

The High Court upheld the trial court: the victim's in‑court identification was credible and sufficiently particular to support conviction despite procedural imperfections in the identification parade; viral circulation of CCTV does not permit judicial notice of screenshots absent proof of authenticity; non‑production of CCTV forensic analysis did not fatally prejudice the prosecution where sworn testimony and other investigative material supported the charge; the alibi was an afterthought and unsupported; and the sentence of 10 years imprisonment and two strokes was within statutory limits and not manifestly excessive.

Citation
BA-42S-1-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Perayu: Nur Muhd Rusydi bin Abdul Raman; Responden: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 May 2021
Case Number
BA-42S-1-01/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (robbery) / High Court Appeal Heard and Dismissed (decision Delivered)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld
Legal Topics
Robbery (section 395/397 Penal Code), Identification Evidence, CCTV Evidence, Judicial Notice, Identification Parade and Dock Identification, Alibi, Police Investigation Practices, Appellate Review of Sentence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Procedure Sentencing Robbery (section 395/397 Penal Code) Identification Evidence CCTV Evidence Judicial Notice +4 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nur Muhd Rusydi bin Abdul Raman

Perayu

Pendakwa Raya

Responden

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (robbery) / High Court Appeal Heard and Dismissed (decision Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether screenshots (IDD1/IDD2) from a viral CCTV video could be judicially noticed and admitted
  2. 2 Whether absence of arrest report affected trial fairness and is a proper ground of appeal
  3. 3 Whether identification parade procedure defects and subsequent dock identification were safe to base a conviction upon

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court upheld the trial court: the victim's in‑court identification was credible and sufficiently particular to support conviction despite procedural imperfections in the identification parade; viral circulation of CCTV does not permit judicial notice of screenshots absent proof of authenticity; non‑production of CCTV forensic analysis did not fatally prejudice the prosecution where sworn testimony and other investigative material supported the charge; the alibi was an afterthought and unsupported; and the sentence of 10 years imprisonment and two strokes was within statutory limits and not manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Conviction for robbery under section 395 read with section 397 of the Penal Code affirmed