The prosecution must establish a prima facie case for conviction in sexual offenses, while corroboration is not always legally required if credible evidence sufficiently supports the victim's account.

Introduction

[1] The Appellant ("Accused") in this case was charged raping his stepdaughter (PW10) age 13 years and 4 months old at the time of the incident. The charge against the Accused read as follows:

Charge:

"Bahawa kamu pada bulan Mac tahun 2012, tarikh tidak pasti di antara jam lebih kurang 12.00 malam hingga 2.00 pagi di alamat No. 36, Jalan Pulau Angsa U10/U32A Seskyen U10 Shah Alam di dalam daerah Petaling di dalam Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan, telah merogol satu perempuan Melayu, Syafira Irwayu bt Mohd Royzilee Kpt: 990408-14-7096 berumur 13 tahun 4 bulan yang mana oleh kerana perhubungan kamu dengannya adalah tidak dibenarkan dibawah undang-undang hukum agama, adat atau kebiasaan untuk berkahwin dengannya dan dengan itu kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan yang boleh dihukum dibawah seksyen 376(3) Kanun Keseksaan."

[2] This appeal was heard before me was on 11 February 2016 and I affirmed the learned trial Sessions Court Judge's decision on both conviction and sentence. I now give my grounds.

Background Facts

[3] The facts are summarized as follows:

3.1 The victim (PW10) stayed together with her mother (PW8) and the Accused (stepfather). The Accused was self-employed as musician and music teacher, whilst PW8 worked as money broker during daytime and singer at night;

3.2 One night at around 2.00 am, the Accused entered the room of PW10 and her younger sibling (Syaria Insyirah). PW10 was wearing T-shirt with trousers;

3.3 At that material time, PW8 was sleeping;

3.4 PW10 was aware that it was the Accused who had entered due to little light from outside even though the room was dark at that time;

3.5 The Accused came and laid down on the left side of PW10 whilst her younger sibling was on her right side. The Accused subsequently hugged PW10 and inserted his finger into PW10's private part (PW10 did not know which exact finger was inserted). Meanwhile, the Accused told PW10 to remain silent. According to PW10, she felt pain from the insertion of the finger into her vagina;

3.6 On the following day, PW10 alluded that the Accused came again at around 1-2am. The Accused laid down on the bed on the left side of PW10 and took out her underwear leaving the clothes worn by PW10;

3.7 The Accused kneeled on the bed to penetrate his penis into PW10's vagina. PW10 further testified that her legs were lying straight ("terlentang kaki lurus") during penetration. PW10 also said that she felt her vagina was sticky;

3.8 After that, PW10 cried and the Accused asked PW10 to not tell anyone. On the next day, PW10 discovered blood near her vagina when she woke up;

3.9 PW10 said that the incident would happen once in a week after the first occurrence. Notwithstanding this, the Prosecution had expressed its stand lucidly that the subject matter of the charge against the Accused in this case was only to one fateful event occurred in March but not the events subsequent to that (page 98, Record of Appeal, vol 1);

3.10 PW10 told the incident to Ainnur Maisarah (PW7) who was her closed friend since Form 1, and then to other friends, viz, Mohd Azran Ariff (PW3) and Nur Farhana (SD3) and also to Pn. Nor Qistina (PW5) who was her counselling teacher;

3.11 In November 2012, PW10 left her mother (PW8) without her consent and stayed with her biological father, Royzale bin Mustapha (PW9). Until on 9/1/2013, PW9 brought PW10 to lodge a report (P12) with regards to this incident after PW10 had told the incident to her grandmother (i.e. PW9's mother who was also known as PW4 during trial) and the grandmother (PW4) informed PW9; and

3.12 The Accused was arrested on 10/1/2013 at IPD Shah Alam.

[4] At the end of Prosecution's case, the learned trial judge found the Prosecu