NORZIHAN BINTI ZAINAL ABIDIN

NORZIHAN BINTI ZAINAL ABIDIN

The High Court allowed the accuseds' appeals and set aside convictions and sentences because the prosecution failed to prove the charges as framed: the evidence showed the honours were conferred by PKDRK (a society) not by the State of Kelantan as alleged in the charges, several victims acknowledged the titles were PKDRK titles or that they dealt with intermediaries, and the trial judge failed to properly consider victims' evidence negating deception and culpability; accordingly prosecution did not prove dishonesty/common intention required under s420 Penal Code.

Citation
WA-42K-12-05/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Saharuddin bin Awang Yahya; Appellant: Norzihan binti Zainal Abidin; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 September 2019
Case Number
WA-42K-12-05/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sessions Court Against Conviction and Sentence Before the High Court
Outcome
Appeals by the accused allowed; convictions and sentences set aside; accused acquitted and discharged; prosecution's appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Cheating (s.420 Penal Code), Dishonesty, Evidence Evaluation, Appellate Review, Title Conferment
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Fraud Cheating (s.420 Penal Code) Dishonesty Evidence Evaluation Appellate Review Title Conferment

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Saharuddin bin Awang Yahya

Appellant

Norzihan binti Zainal Abidin

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sessions Court Against Conviction and Sentence Before the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved element of deception under section 420 Penal Code
  2. 2 Whether the titles purportedly conferred were state honours or society (PKDRK) honours
  3. 3 Whether victims were deceived and whether accused had dishonest intention and common intention

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court allowed the accuseds' appeals and set aside convictions and sentences because the prosecution failed to prove the charges as framed: the evidence showed the honours were conferred by PKDRK (a society) not by the State of Kelantan as alleged in the charges, several victims acknowledged the titles were PKDRK titles or that they dealt with intermediaries, and the trial judge failed to properly consider victims' evidence negating deception and culpability; accordingly prosecution did not prove dishonesty/common intention required under s420 Penal Code.

Court Disposition

Appeals by the accused allowed; convictions and sentences set aside; accused acquitted and discharged; prosecution's appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Allow appeals by both accused
  • Set aside convictions and sentences