Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Fingerprint corroboration

Legal area

Court

12 Mar 2020

1. ) Muhamad Ridha Bin Baharudin 2. )

Citation

W-05(SH)-560-11/2018, W-05(SH)-560-11/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

W-05(SH)-560-11/2018, W-05(SH)-560-11/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The appeal is allowed because the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case: PW4’s testimony contained a material contradiction with his police report and he refused to answer crucial cross-examination questions, undermining his credibility; coupled with the absence of the accused’s fingerprints on the seized sling bag, the prosecution’s foundation collapsed and the accused’s defence need not be called, rendering the conviction unsafe.
12 Mar 2020

Muhamad Ridha Bin Baharudin

Citation

W-05(SH)-560-11/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

W-05(SH)-560-11/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the accused's appeal because the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case: PW4's material contradiction between his oral evidence and police report regarding when the sling bag was thrown, his refusal to answer defence questions about a co-accused's arrest, and negative fingerprint results on the exhibit collectively destroyed the credibility and strength of the prosecution case so that the defence need not be called and the conviction was unsafe; the Public Prosecutor's cross-appeal was dismissed.