SYAZWAN AFIQ BIN SHARIFF [ ]

SYAZWAN AFIQ BIN SHARIFF [ ]

The High Court allowed the appeal because the prosecution failed to prove the essential element of recent penile penetration beyond reasonable doubt: the complainants testimony was inconsistent and unreliable on critical points, medical and forensic evidence did not demonstrate recent penetration or presence of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
DA-42JSKS-2-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Syazwan Afiq bin Shariff; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 May 2025
Case Number
DA-42JSKS-2-04/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (rape/sexual Offence) / Appeal to High Court Against Conviction and Sentence From Sessions Court; Appeal Heard on Record and Decided at End of Defence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed; appellant acquitted and discharged.
Legal Topics
Rape, Child Sexual Assault, Credibility of Complainant, Medical/forensic Evidence (hymen Examination), DNA Evidence, Burden of Proof
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Forensic Science Procedural Law Rape Child Sexual Assault Credibility of Complainant +3 more

Source-derived case record

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Syazwan Afiq bin Shariff

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (rape/sexual Offence) / Appeal to High Court Against Conviction and Sentence From Sessions Court; Appeal Heard on Record and Decided at End of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved penetration and rape beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether the victims testimony was reliable given inconsistencies about consciousness and ability to observe the act
  3. 3 Whether medical evidence (absence of recent hymenal tear) and forensic evidence (absence of spermatozoa on body; mixed DNA on bedding) support conviction

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court allowed the appeal because the prosecution failed to prove the essential element of recent penile penetration beyond reasonable doubt: the complainants testimony was inconsistent and unreliable on critical points, medical and forensic evidence did not demonstrate recent penetration or presence of spermatozoa on the victims body, and mixed DNA on bedding was not conclusive; the trial judge erred in shifting burden to the accused. Conviction could not stand and appellant was acquitted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed; appellant acquitted and discharged.

Orders

  • Conviction set aside
  • Sentence of 8 years imprisonment and 2 strokes quashed