ROSLI BIN HARUN

ROSLI BIN HARUN

Although the court accepted the stated delay (approximately two months ten days) and reasons such as prison Covid-19 restrictions as reasonable, the applications were dismissed because the applicant failed to specify any substantive grounds of appeal or exhibit a proposed petition of appeal; absence of demonstrated prospects of success meant the court would not exercise its discretion under section 310 to grant leave to file notices of appeal out of time.

Citation
DA-44-59-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: Rosli bin Harun; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 April 2022
Case Number
DA-44-59-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Extension of Time to File Notice of Appeal / Application for Leave Under Section 310 CPC
Outcome
All three applications for leave to file notices of appeal out of time dismissed.
Legal Topics
Section 310 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (criminal Procedure Code), Extension of Time, Notice of Appeal, Leave to Appeal, Prospects of Success
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Procedure Appeal Section 310 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah (criminal Procedure Code) Extension of Time Notice of Appeal Leave to Appeal Prospects of Success

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 3
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 / Application for Leave Under Section 310 CPC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether leave should be granted under section 310 to file notice of appeal out of time
  2. 2 Whether applicant has provided sufficient cause for the delay
  3. 3 Whether applicant has presented reasonable/strong prospects of success on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

Although the court accepted the stated delay (approximately two months ten days) and reasons such as prison Covid-19 restrictions as reasonable, the applications were dismissed because the applicant failed to specify any substantive grounds of appeal or exhibit a proposed petition of appeal; absence of demonstrated prospects of success meant the court would not exercise its discretion under section 310 to grant leave to file notices of appeal out of time.

Court Disposition

All three applications for leave to file notices of appeal out of time dismissed.

Orders

  • The Court dismissed all three Notices of Application filed by the applicant seeking leave under section 310 to file Notices of Appeal out of time.