MUGILAN A/L MANI [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

MUGILAN A/L MANI [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Given the violent nature of the offence (use of a knife, threats to kill, multiple injuries), absence of consent, and need for deterrence and public protection, the trial court did not err in principle and the 18-year imprisonment with 5 strokes is not manifestly excessive; mitigating factors of youth and drug influence were not sufficiently weighty to justify reduction; therefore appeal against sentence dismissed and original sentence upheld.

Citation
JB-42S-6-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant / Accused: Mugilan A/L Mani; Respondent / Public Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 August 2023
Case Number
JB-42S-6-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Appellate Judgment on Sentence (appeal Against Sentence)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; sentence upheld
Legal Topics
Sexual Connection by Object, Section 377 CA Penal Code, Section 354 Penal Code, Sentence Review, Aggravating Factors, Use of Weapon
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Sentencing Sexual Connection by Object Section 377 CA Penal Code Section 354 Penal Code Sentence Review Aggravating Factors +1 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mugilan A/L Mani

Appellant / Accused

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent / Public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Appellate Judgment on Sentence (appeal Against Sentence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 18-year imprisonment and 5 strokes sentence under s377CA is manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether appellant's youth and drug influence are valid mitigating factors
  3. 3 Whether the trial court erred in principle in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

Given the violent nature of the offence (use of a knife, threats to kill, multiple injuries), absence of consent, and need for deterrence and public protection, the trial court did not err in principle and the 18-year imprisonment with 5 strokes is not manifestly excessive; mitigating factors of youth and drug influence were not sufficiently weighty to justify reduction; therefore appeal against sentence dismissed and original sentence upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; sentence upheld

Orders

  • Appeal against sentence dismissed
  • Sentence of 18 years imprisonment and 5 strokes for offence under s377CA Penal Code upheld