Appellate courts uphold trial findings of witness credibility and support enhanced sentencing for police misconduct to deter future violations and protect public trust.

Introduction

[1] The Appellant, Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa, had appealed against the decision of the present learned Sessions Court Judge 1 (SCJ) of Taiping who convicted him on 29 November 2023 after a full trial was held on the following charge (copied from the grounds of judgment of the learned SCJ):

Pertuduhan Pindaan di dalam kes AP-82-3-10/2020

Bahawa kamu pada 18 June 2020, jam di antara pukul 4.30 pagi sehingga 5.30 25 pagi bertempat di pejabat Hal Ehwal Awam, Bahagian Pengurusan Ibu Pejabat Polis Daerah Selama, 34100 Selama, Perak di dalam Derah Larut Matang dan Selama, di dalam Negeri Perak dengan tujuan melakukan pemerasan telah meletakkan XXX (No. K/P: XXX) dalam ketakutan akan suatu bencana iaitu dilaporkan ke Pejabat Agama, dan dengan jalan demikian itu telah mendorong dengan curangnya XXX (No. K/P: XXX) untuk menyerahkan kepada kamu wang tunai berjumlah RM300.00, dan dengan itu kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan yang boleh dihukum di bawah s 385 Kanun Keseksaan .

[2] The Appellant was originally charged for the above offence and another offence under s 376(2)(f) of the Penal Code but he was acquitted of this charge after trial, which read:

Pertuduhan di dalam kes AB-61JS-1-11/2020

Bahawa kamu pada antara 18 June 2020 jam lebih kurang antara 2.00 pagi hingga 5.00 pagi bertempat di pejabat HEA Pengurusan, Ibu Pejabat Daerah Selama, di dalam Derah Larut Matang (Selama) di dalam negeri Perak telah merogol XXX, No KPT:XXX dengan kerelaanya, apabila kerelaanya diperolehi dengan menggunakan kedudukan berkuasa kamu terhadapnya atau kerana hubungan professional atau hubungan amanah lain yang berhubung dengannya, Dan oleh yang demikian kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan di bawah s 376(2)(f) Kanun Keseksaan yang boleh dihukum di bawah s 376(2) Kanun Keseksaan .

[3] Both charges were heard together by the previous SCJ who then went on mandatory retirement (after she had called for defence on both charges). The present SCJ had viewed the Notes of Evidence and recording of procedings at the prosecution stage. After trial, the SCJ acquitted him of the rape charge, convicted him on the s 385 Penal Code charge and sentenced him to 3 years' imprisonment from the date of conviction.

[4] The learned Deputy Public Prosecutor (Respondent here) had appealed against the acquittal in case No AB-42LB(A)-1-12/2023 and sentence in Criminal Appeal No AB-42H(A)-3-12/2023.

[5] After hearing submissions of both parties on the 3 appeals (the hearing was held on 2 February 2025 and 3 May 2025, the Court dismissed the Appellant's appeal against conviction and sentence as well as the appeal against acquittal by the DPP. However, the Court increased the sentence of the Appellant from 3 years to 5 years imprisonment, given the circumstances of the case. The Appellant filed a Notice of Appeal against this Court's decision on 5 June 2025. The Court now gives its reasons for upholding the conviction by the SCJ and enhancing the sentence against him. For convenience, I have prepared only 1 Grounds of Judgment for all the 3 appeals heard before me.

Prosecution Case

[6] The facts of the case has been obtained from the grounds of judgment of the learned SCJ. The prosecution called 15 witnesses to prove its case as follows:

SP1 - Lans Koperal Asri Bin Jamin (Jurugambar)

SP2 - Inspektor Yuwaraja A/L L Kanapathy (Pegawai tangkapan)