Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Proportionality in sentencing

Legal area

Court

5 Nov 2024

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] TAN CHUAN MING

Citation

WA-45B-7-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45B-7-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case for murder under s.302 but established a prima facie case for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s.304(a). The defendant pleaded guilty to the amended charge; having weighed guilty plea, first offender status, remorse, lengthy pre-trial detention and public interest and proportionality, the court sentenced the defendant to 12 years' imprisonment effective from arrest on 15.3.2020.
13 Jul 2021

PENDAKWARAYA Mohamad Ramadzan bin Mohd Yusof

Citation

AB-45A-6-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-45A-6-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The sentences were within the statutory minima prescribed by the Dangerous Drugs Act given the weights of the drugs seized; the two offences were legally distinct (different provisions and different drugs) and therefore sentences were properly ordered to run consecutively from the date of arrest; the sentences are proportional and serve legitimate deterrent and public interest purposes.
17 Dec 2020

PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya Chin Wah Seng

Citation

JA-83-4941-10/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

JA-83-4941-10/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Magistrate accepted that offences were not 'serious' under s52B, that mandatory imprisonment language in Customs Act did not preclude exercise of discretion under s294, and on balance of public interest, offender's first‑time status, low value of goods and guilty plea imposed a two‑year bond with RM3,000 surety for the Customs charge and a RM2,000 fine (or 2 months' imprisonment if unpaid) for the Excise charge.
17 Aug 2020

PENDAKWARAYA Timbalan Doris Chang Nyet Hou

Citation

BH83-982-05/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BH83-982-05/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The accused, owner of the CIMB account into which RM348,500 (USD85,000) was credited, was convicted under s.424 Penal Code but her culpability was reduced by plea of guilty, first offender status and her role as a victim-mule; balancing public interest, proportionality and mitigation the court imposed a fine of RM4,000 in default seven months imprisonment as an appropriate and lawful sentence.
25 Nov 2019

JONATHAN A/L ERYTHAM

Citation

AB-41S-9-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-41S-9-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court held the magistrate's fines (RM3,000 and RM4,500) were within legal power and affirmed them, but the aggregate default imprisonment of 16 months was disproportionate and ordered reduction because the magistrate failed to properly consider the proviso to section 283(1)(b)(iv) CPC and the minimum imprisonment threshold under Section 427 PC; default imprisonment was reduced to 2 months per charge (4 months total).

Malaysia Case Law

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] TAN CHUAN MING

PENDAKWARAYA Mohamad Ramadzan bin Mohd Yusof

PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya Chin Wah Seng

PENDAKWARAYA Timbalan Doris Chang Nyet Hou

JONATHAN A/L ERYTHAM