ZULPANDY BIN RISPEN EFFENDI

ZULPANDY BIN RISPEN EFFENDI

The appellate court upheld the conviction because the trial judge's finding that the complainant's testimony was clear, detailed, consistent and corroborated by independent witnesses and documentary evidence was reasonable on the record; deficiencies in forensic/CCTV evidence and the existence of an old hymenal tear did not render the prosecution case unsafe, and there was no demonstrable misdirection or perversity in the trial court's assessment of credibility.

Citation
BA-42JSKS-8-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant: Zulpandy bin Rispen Effendi; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 February 2026
Case Number
BA-42JSKS-8-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed
Legal Topics
Rape, Child Sexual Abuse, Credibility of Witness, Medical/forensic Evidence, Police Investigation, Sentencing
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Evidence Law Rape Child Sexual Abuse Credibility of Witness Medical/forensic Evidence Police Investigation +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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Zulpandy bin Rispen Effendi

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether trial judge erred in finding a prima facie case requiring accused to enter defence
  2. 2 Whether the child complainant's evidence was credible and sufficient to prove penetration beyond reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether lack of corroborative forensic/CCTV/DNA evidence fatally undermines prosecution case

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate court upheld the conviction because the trial judge's finding that the complainant's testimony was clear, detailed, consistent and corroborated by independent witnesses and documentary evidence was reasonable on the record; deficiencies in forensic/CCTV evidence and the existence of an old hymenal tear did not render the prosecution case unsafe, and there was no demonstrable misdirection or perversity in the trial court's assessment of credibility.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed

Orders

  • Conviction under Section 376(1) upheld
  • Sentence of imprisonment 10 years from date of arrest (07/07/2022) upheld