Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Identification of victim

Legal area

Court

16 Dec 2020

[ ] Muhammad Shan Bin Abdullah

Citation

AA-42LB-1-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-42LB-1-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appellate court held that on maximum evaluation of the prosecution case a prima facie case existed: the victim's consistent CIC testimony coupled with eyewitness PW2 and mother’s disclosure sufficiently identified the victim and established the sexual touching; omissions as to precise date/time and minor name discrepancies did not prejudice the accused or vitiate the charge because date/time were not essential; the recorded interview was admissible despite lack of certification because the recording officer testified and statutory and evidential provisions permit admission; therefore the Sess…
16 Dec 2020

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MUHAMMAD SHAN ABDULLAH

Citation

AA-42LB-1-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AA-42LB-1-03/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Defects in particulars of date/time or minor name discrepancies do not invalidate a sexual offence charge under Act 792 where identity and the sexual act are sufficiently established and the accused is not prejudiced; because the victim gave direct, consistent evidence and an eyewitness identified the accused and the recording officer testified, a prima facie case existed and the appeal succeeds to remit the matter for the accused to be called to enter his defence.