SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2019 MarsdenLR 137

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
CHRIS CHRISTIAN & ORS – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent


Table of Content
1. overview of the case against three accused charged for drug trafficking. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. key issues concerning disclosure rights under s 112 cpc. (Para 4 , 5)
3. court's observations on the privilege of witness statements. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10)
A. Decision

[1] All three applicants/accused were charged on 30 June 2017 for drug trafficking, an offence punishable under s 39B(1)(a) of the DDA 1952. The case for the prosecution had been concluded. On 27 September 2019, I found that the prosecution has made out a prima facie case against the accused and called upon all the accused to enter their defence.

[2] On the same day, the defence counsel for the 2nd accused wrote to the prosecution requesting for a copy of s 112 statement by those witnesses who were offered to the defence to be furnished to the defence counsel. The relevant excerpt is as follows:

"2. Tujuan kami menulis surat ini kepada Tuan adalah untuk memohon supaya sesalinan kenyataan saksi-saksi yang direkodkan di bawah s 112 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah bagi saksi-saksi yang ditawarkan kepada pembelaan dapat dibekalkan kepada pihak kami dengan kadar segera."

[3] The defence counsel, in supporting the request ha

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top