PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 1. MOHD RUZAINI BIN SAMINGAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX) 2. ROSZAIMI BIN ROSLAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX)

PENDAKWARAYA PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 1. MOHD RUZAINI BIN SAMINGAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX) 2. ROSZAIMI BIN ROSLAN (I/C NO. : XXXXXX-XX-XXXX)

The s.51 application was dismissed because the defence failed to establish the s.51 prerequisites: although the report was referenced in exhibit P34, the defence did not demonstrate necessity and desirability nor that the report was not privileged; police investigation reports/statements recorded after investigation commenced are privileged and the prosecution, not intending to tender the report, had no duty to supply it; therefore the court exercises its discretion to disallow production.

Citation
JB-45-10-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Mohd Ruzaini bin Samingan; Accused: Roszaimi bin Roslan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 March 2021
Case Number
JB-45-10-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Drugs (s.39 B) / Trial Interlocutory Application Under S.51 CPC
Outcome
Application under section 51 Criminal Procedure Code disallowed
Legal Topics
Section 51 Criminal Procedure Code, Police Report / First Information Report (s.107), Police Statements (s.112) Privilege, Disclosure/production of Documents, Relevancy and Specificity Requirements
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Procedure Evidence Law Drugs Law Section 51 Criminal Procedure Code Police Report / First Information Report (s.107) Police Statements (s.112) Privilege Disclosure/production of Documents Relevancy and Specificity Requirements

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 26 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Mohd Ruzaini bin Samingan

Accused

Roszaimi bin Roslan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Drugs (s.39 B) / Trial Interlocutory Application Under S.51 CPC

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a police report (Batu Pahat 024281/16) must be produced to the defence under s.51 CPC
  2. 2 Whether police reports/statements recorded in the course of investigation are privileged and not disclosable
  3. 3 What are the prerequisites for an order under s.51 (relevancy, specificity, possession, necessity, desirability)

Ratio Decidendi

The s.51 application was dismissed because the defence failed to establish the s.51 prerequisites: although the report was referenced in exhibit P34, the defence did not demonstrate necessity and desirability nor that the report was not privileged; police investigation reports/statements recorded after investigation commenced are privileged and the prosecution, not intending to tender the report, had no duty to supply it; therefore the court exercises its discretion to disallow production.

Court Disposition

Application under section 51 Criminal Procedure Code disallowed

Orders

  • Application disallowed