The court emphasizes the necessity of clear evidential bases for guilty pleas and the procedural safeguards required for their acceptance.

[1] This was an appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the sentence imposed on 9 May 2016 by the learned Sessions Judge on Nor Zuliana bt Tahir, the first respondent, and Zuhairi bin Kassim, the second respondent.

[2] I will first narrate the facts. The first and second respondents are wife and husband. On 9 June 2014, the first respondent was charged with the commission of two offences relating to her son. The first charge against her was framed under s 304(a) and read as follows:-

"Bahawa kamu pada 23 Mei 2014 jam antara 12.30 tengahari hingga 2 petang di alamat 03-13, Pangsapuri Permai Ria, Taman Permai, Ampang, di dalam daerah Ampang Jaya di dalam negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan, telah melakukan perbuatan yang menyebabkan kematian xxx (6 tahun) dengan niat hendak menyebabkan kematian, dan dengan itu kamu telah melakukan kesalahan mematikan orang dengan salah yang tidak terjumlah kepada kesalahan membunuh dan boleh dihukum di bawah s 304(a) Kanun Keseksaan ."

[3] The offence was punishable with a term of imprisonment not exceeding 30 years imprisonment and a fine, if the act by which the death was caused was done with the intention of causing death, or of causing such bodily injury as was likely to cause death.

[4] The respondents were jointly charged in respect of the second charge under s 31(1) of the Child Act 2001. It read:-

"Bahawa kamu pada 23 Mei 2014 sehingga 26 Mei 2014 jam lebih kurang 12.30 tengahari di alamat 03-13, Pangsapuri Permai Ria, Tasik Permai, Ampang, di dalam daerah Ampang Jaya, di dalam negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan, dengan niat bersama yang ditakrifkan di bawah s 34 Kanun Keseksaan , sebagai orang yang mempunyai penjagaan ke atas kanak-kanak yang bernama xxx, tarikh lahir 02 Mei 2008, umur 6 tahun, didapati telah melakukan penganiayaan terhadap kanak-kanak tersebut. Oleh yang demikian kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan yang boleh dihukum di bawah s 31(1)(a) Akta Kanak-Kanak 2001 ."

[5] The offence was punishable with a fine not exceeding RM20,000.00 or 10 years imprisonment or both.

[6] The prosecution called 13 witnesses to prove the charges. According to the prosecution evidence, the first respondent had 4 children from her first marriage. After her divorce, she remarried the second respondent and had another 4 children by him. On 26 May 2014, about 3 pm, the second respondent took his stepson, xxx ("the deceased") aged 6, to the emergency department at Ampang Hospital. One Dr Lau Ee Chang (PW12) who attended to him on admission pronounced him dead on arrival. In his medical report, Dr Lau noted "Father claims had hot water accidentally poured on him 3 days ago. Today morning fell down and hit his face on the floor....". Dr Lau further noted in his medical report that apart from surface burn marks on the face, body, back and hands and limbs, the deceased also had other injuries. Suspecting that the deceased had been abused, he lodged a police report.

[7] The next day, on 27 May 2014, a post mortem examination of the deceased was conducted by pathologist Dr Nurliza bte Abdullah (PW4). She confirmed the presence of burn marks on his head, neck and upper and lower limbs. She further found bruises and abrasions on his body and a close impacted fracture of the left femur "of recent time origin." In her report, Dr Nurliza expressed the view that the deceased's cause of death was due to "untreated severe scald burns (33.5%) on the body" and that these injuries were not self inflicted.

[8] Under cross examination, PW4 was shown two police photographs marked as exhs P3 [27] and [28] which were taken at the apartment where the respondents lived with their children. The photographs showed an electric jug kettle (exh P16A) positioned on top of a Jacobs' biscuit tin p