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

2016 MarsdenLR 353

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
PP – Appellant
Versus
HOUSSIN SAZZAD – Respondent


Table of Content
1. accused charged under trafficking law. (Para 1 , 2)
2. facts establish smuggling incident. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. consideration of facts, mitigation, and prosecutorial stance. (Para 6)
4. arguments for and against sentencing. (Para 7 , 8)
Suraya Othman J:

Introduction

[1] The accused in this case was charged with an offence under s 26A of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007 (Act 670) ("ATIPSOM") read together with s 34 of the Penal Code (Act 574). I found him guilty and sentenced him to 15 months' imprisonment from the date of his arrest (05 January 2016) and ordered that he be deported to his country of origin after serving his sentence. Dissatisfied with the sentence meted out, the prosecution has appealed against my decision which I now give my reasons for.

The Charge

[2] The charge against accused reads as follows:

"Bahawa kamu bersama-sama pada 05 Januari 2016 jam lebih kurang 8.20 pagi di Aras 4, MTB, KLIA, dalam daerah Sepang, dalam Negeri Selangor bagi mencapai niat bersama kamu telah menjalankan penyeludupan migran iaitu Ahmed Jowel [No Passport: BH0487979] dan oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan yang boleh

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