Back
HIGH COURT SABAH & SARAWAK KUCHING
RENATOE ANAK MICHAEL – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal filed post-sentence (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. arguments on appeal time limits (Para 7 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 3. legal principles governing appeal timeframe (Para 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 4. incompetent appeal due to time lapse (Para 18 , 27 , 28) |
Introduction
[1] The present matter concerns an appeal filed by the Appellant to the High Court against his sentence.
Brief Background Facts
[2] The Appellant claimed trial to an offence of incest under s 376B(1) of the Penal Code (" PC ") at the Session Court at Kuching.
[3] The second amended charge against the Appellant read as follows:
Amended Charge
That you, on 25 December 2021, at about 1900hrs, at a house Lot 1550, Lorong 6, Taman Riverview, Bintawa, in the District of Kuching, in the State of SarawAk, had committed incest with your biological daughter, Sasha Cammy Anak Renatoe (NRIC: 090216-13-0608) (12 years old) whose relationship to you is such that you are not permitted, under the law, religion, custom or usage applicable to you, to marry her and you have thereby committed an offence punishable under s 376B(1) of the Penal Code .
Sentence
Shall be punished with i
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
