Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Outrage of modesty

  • 24 Jun 2024

    WONG YUNG HAO

    Citation
    WA-83JS-248-08/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    WA-83JS-248-08/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Prosecution proved beyond a prima facie standard that the accused intentionally used criminal force on the complainant on three occasions within a single transaction and with intent to outrage her modesty; SP1’s evidence was credible and consistent with CCTV and supporting witness SP2, defence explanations were inconsistent with the record and did not raise reasonable doubt; accordingly the accused is guilty under section 354 Penal Code and liable to sentence.

  • 9 Mar 2023

    SYED FAIRUS BIN SYED A BAKAR (AZHAR)

    Citation
    WA-83JS-170-05/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    WA-83JS-170-05/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Applying maximum evaluation, the court found the prosecution proved the elements of s.354 beyond reasonable doubt as the complainant's consistent, contemporaneous account and supporting reports to colleagues and HR established criminal force with intent to outrage modesty; defence failed to raise reasonable doubt; therefore accused convicted and sentenced to fine RM5000 (default 4 months imprisonment).

  • 12 May 2022

    ABDUL AZIZ BIN ISMAIL [ ]

    Citation
    AB-42S-1-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AB-42S-1-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The appeal court found the charge materially defective because the particulars describe acts amounting to outrage of modesty under section 354 while the prosecution charged attempted rape under section 376(3) read with section 511; the accused was thereby misled and suffered an unfair trial. Further, the evidence did not establish beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had progressed beyond preparation to an attempt to rape; accordingly there was miscarriage of justice and the conviction was quashed with the accused acquitted and discharged.

  • 26 Nov 2019

    Abd Khalid Bin Hussin

    Citation
    AB-42S-7-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AB-42S-7-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Appellate court reduced total imprisonment to 15 years (5 years under section 354 to remain; 20 years under section 376B reduced to 10 years) to reflect mitigating factors (age, guilty plea, first offence) while upholding the need to denounce and protect victims; whipping order was set aside as illegal because section 376B is not within the exceptions to section 289 CPC for males over fifty; police supervision order under section 295(1A) was set aside because the provision does not specifically reference incest under section 376B.