SITI AISYAH vs PP - 2018 MarsdenLR 977

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2018 MarsdenLR 977

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
SITI AISYAH – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Gooi Soon Seng ,Respondent Advocate: Muhamad Iskandar Ahmad

Table of Content
1. application for document production under s 51(1) of cpc. (Para 1 , 2)
2. discussion on privilege and necessity of disclosure in trials. (Para 3 , 4 , 25)
3. arguments for necessity and public interest in disclosure. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. respondent's rebuttal on privilege and fairness. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
5. importance of preserving witness statements and preventing tampering. (Para 12 , 24)
6. establishing the absolute privilege of police statements. (Para 21 , 22)

[1] In essence, this is an application made by the applicant under s 51(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code via notice of motion dated 5 November 2018 (encl 1) supported by affidavit affirmed by Kulaselvi Sandrasegaran dated 5 November 2018 for an order from this court to direct the prosecution to provide copies of statements recorded under s 112 of the CPC to the applicant made by the seven named witnesses offered by the prosecution to the defence at the close of the prosecution case. The witnesses are:

(i) Ahmad Fuad Ramli;

(ii) Lim Cheng Gam;

(iii) Tomie Yoshio;

(iv) Ng Wai Hoong;

(v) Dessy Meyrisinta;

(vi) Raisa Rinda Salma; and

(vii) Kamaruddin Masiod.

[2] In respect of Muhammad Farid Jallaludin, a non offered

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2018 MarsdenLR 977

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAMSITI AISYAH – AppellantVersusPP – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

HIGH COURT MALAYA SHAH ALAM
SITI AISYAH – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent