Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Kidnapping for ransom

Legal area

Court

5 Dec 2024

Goh Jit Ee [Pegawai Pendakwa]

Citation

P-05(SH)-548-11/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

P-05(SH)-548-11/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court affirmed the trial judge: the identification evidence (victim and aunty at parade and in court) was reliable under Turnbull analysis; information and conduct of the accused led to discovery of ransom money and was admissible under s.27; serial-number matching and corroborating witness evidence established a ransom demand; the collective conduct supported an inference of common intention under s.34; cumulatively these facts satisfied proof beyond reasonable doubt, so convictions and sentences were affirmed.
22 Jan 2024

LEW NGEE CHIN [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-155-05/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-155-05/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

On the facts the Court of Appeal held the convictions of OKT1 and OKT2 were safe because direct identification by the victim and corroborating witness testimony together with forensic evidence (DNA, fingerprints) and recovery of ransom established all elements of the offence beyond reasonable doubt; conviction of OKT3 was unsafe because signing a tenancy agreement and presence of non-marked cash at the premises were insufficient to prove common intention under s34 KK or to connect him to the kidnapping beyond reasonable doubt. Sentences of life imprisonment were disturbed to 30 years for OKT1…
22 Jan 2024

CHIN YOON TACK @ CHIN YOON TOCK [ ]

Citation

B-05(SH)-154-05/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-154-05/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Rayuan terhadap sabitan OKT1 dan OKT2 ditolak kerana keterangan pengecaman oleh mangsa dan saksi lain disokong oleh bukti forensik (DNA, cap jari) serta penemuan wang tebusan, menghasilkan bukti yang konsisten dan melimpah ruah bagi setiap intipati pertuduhan; manakala sabitan terhadap OKT3 diketepikan kerana bukti terhadapnya terhad kepada tandatangan pada perjanjian sewa dan wang tidak bertanda yang dijumpai di premis, tidak mencukupi untuk membuktikan niat bersama di bawah seksyen 34 KK beyond reasonable doubt.
3 Mar 2022

Suhaimi Bin Alias [ ]

Citation

B-05(H)-53-01/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

B-05(H)-53-01/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Conviction and sentence were upheld because the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant participated in the abduction and confinement of victims for ransom; identification by victim and raiding officer, corroborated dock identifications, bank deposit evidence and the application of section 34 Penal Code (common intention) established liability even absent direct proof that appellant personally made the ransom demand; sentencing to life imprisonment and ten lashes was lawful and was only varied to commence from the date of arrest (16.3.2014).
22 Nov 2019

PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya Riduansyah Yahya Siow Kek Keong

Citation

45C-7-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

45C-7-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court convicted because eyewitness identification of Tertuduh 1 and 2 by the victim's mother and a taxi driver (via identity parades and court testimony), corroborating CCTV and telephone ransom demand evidence, together with substantial recovery of ransom monies from Tertuduh 3 and parts from Tertuduh 1 and 2 following leading-to-discovery statements, established the elements of the offence and common intention; defence explanations were inconsistent, uncorroborated and constituted afterthoughts/alibis insufficient to raise reasonable doubt.

Malaysia Case Law

Goh Jit Ee [Pegawai Pendakwa]

LEW NGEE CHIN [ ]

CHIN YOON TACK @ CHIN YOON TOCK [ ]

Suhaimi Bin Alias [ ]

PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya Riduansyah Yahya Siow Kek Keong