ROSLI BIN HARUN

ROSLI BIN HARUN

Although the court accepted the applicant's explanation for a short delay (2 months 10 days), the applicant failed to demonstrate any specific or substantial grounds of appeal or exhibit a proposed petition; a mere attack on sentence without identified meritorious grounds is insufficient; therefore the court exercised its discretion under section 310 to refuse leave and dismissed the applications.

Citation
DA-44-60-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: Rosli bin Harun; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 April 2022
Case Number
DA-44-60-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal Under Section 310 Criminal Procedure Code / High Court Hearing on S.310 Application
Outcome
All three applications dismissed
Legal Topics
Extension of Time, Section 310 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (ktj), Notice of Appeal, Delay and Indulgence, Prospects of Success on Appeal, Sentencing Discretion
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Appeals Sentencing Extension of Time Section 310 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (ktj) Notice of Appeal Delay and Indulgence +2 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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rosli bin Harun

Applicant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal Under Section 310 Criminal Procedure Code / High Court Hearing on S.310 Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted under section 310 KTJ to file Notice of Appeal out of time
  2. 2 Whether the delay was justified
  3. 3 Whether the applicant has shown reasonable prospects of success on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Although the court accepted the applicant's explanation for a short delay (2 months 10 days), the applicant failed to demonstrate any specific or substantial grounds of appeal or exhibit a proposed petition; a mere attack on sentence without identified meritorious grounds is insufficient; therefore the court exercised its discretion under section 310 to refuse leave and dismissed the applications.

Court Disposition

All three applications dismissed

Orders

  • All three applications for leave to file Notice of Appeal out of time are dismissed