Wan Aziz Bin Wan Omar [ ]

Wan Aziz Bin Wan Omar [ ]

High Court held prosecution proved a prima facie case and supporting evidence (victim identification, corroborative family testimony, medical evidence) was sufficient; appellant's alibi evidence was inadmissible for non-compliance with s.402A and his sworn denials amounted to mere denial; sentencing was within proper bounds and not manifestly excessive; therefore convictions and sentences were upheld.

Citation
DA-42JSKS-4-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Wan Aziz bin Wan Omar; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 July 2025
Case Number
DA-42JSKS-4-11/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Hearing and Determination on Appeal at High Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences of Sessions Court affirmed.
Legal Topics
Rape, Alibi, Prima Facie, Sentencing, Vulnerable Witness
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Procedure Rape Alibi Prima Facie Sentencing +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Wan Aziz bin Wan Omar

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Hearing and Determination on Appeal at High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved a prima facie case warranting calling accused to answer
  2. 2 Whether accused's alibi evidence was admissible without compliance with s.402A CPC
  3. 3 Whether the victim's evidence and supporting evidence were sufficient despite low IQ (OKU)

Ratio Decidendi

High Court held prosecution proved a prima facie case and supporting evidence (victim identification, corroborative family testimony, medical evidence) was sufficient; appellant's alibi evidence was inadmissible for non-compliance with s.402A and his sworn denials amounted to mere denial; sentencing was within proper bounds and not manifestly excessive; therefore convictions and sentences were upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences of Sessions Court affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions and sentences of the Sessions Court are upheld