Back
2017 MarsdenLR 63
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PP – Appellant
Versus
MOHD KHAIROL FAIZI ABU BAKAR – Respondent
[Criminal Appeal No: B-05(LB)-308-11/2015]
Witness identification must be accepted unless directly challenged; failure to cross-examine implies acceptance of credibility.
Headnote:In this appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the acquittal of the respondent charged with murder under section 302 and section 34 of the Penal Code, the evidence was deemed credible and sufficient for conviction. The court found the trial judge’s reconsideration of witness credibility unjustified, ultimately concluding that the accused was present at the crime scene and guilty of murder.
Result: The appeal is allowed (paragraphs 1-93).
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the public prosecutor appealed against the acquittal of the respondent based on the determination of the trial judge. (Para 1 , 2) |
[1] This was an appeal by the Public Prosecutor against the acquittal of the respondent who was charged together with one Murali @ Ramesh S Kaliaperumal ("Murali") with the murder of Ravi Shanker K Ramasamy ("the deceased"). The charge (as amended) against them was as follows:
"Bahawa kamu secara bersama-sama dengan tiga (3) lagi yang masih bebas di antara 29 Ogos 2009, jam lebih kurang 6.30 petang di Green Zone Landscape & Nursery, Lot 4136, Jalan Sungai Long, Kajang, di dalam Daerah Kajang, di dalam Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan telah membunuh seorang lelaki bernama Ravi Shanker K Ramasamy (No K/P: A1267463) dan dengan itu kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan di bawah s 302 Kanun Keseksaan di baca bersama dengan s 34 Kanun Keseksaan yang boleh dihukum di bawah s 302 Kanun yang sama."
[2] At the close of the prosecution's case, Murali was acquitted and discharged without his defence being called as the learned trial judge found that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against him. The respondent was however called to enter his defence to the charge but he too was acquitted and discharged at the close of the defence case. The learned judge found that he had established his alibi and had cast a reasonable doubt in the prosecution's case.
