WAN SULEIMAN, RAJA AZLAN SHAH, SUFFIAN
JOHNSON TAN HAN SENG – Appellant
Versus
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Respondent
Suffian LP:
These four appeals were argued one after another in the combined hearing of all counsel involved, as some of the grounds of the appeal overlap.
In appealNo. 40 the accused was sentenced to death for the offences of possession of firearm contrary to s. 57(1)(a) and of ammunition contrary to s. 57(1)(b) of the Internal Security Act, Act 82 ("ISA"). Similarly, the accused in appealNo. 46. In appealNo. 39 the accused was sentenced to life imprisonment for the offence of consorting with the accused in appealNo. 40 contrary to s. 58(1) ISA. In appealNo. 43 the accused was acquitted of the offences of possession of firearm and ammunition contrary to s. 57(1)(a) and (b) ISA.
Offences against ss. 57 and 58 of ISA are security offences and cases against all the accused are therefore security cases, see reg. 2(1) of the Essential (Security Cases) Regulations, 1975 ("the 1975 regulations" or "the regulations"), published as PU(A) 320 and amended by PU(A) 362 in 1975, and so by virtue of reg. 3 of the regulations they were tried in accordance with the special rules of procedure and evidence prescribed by the regulations.
Validity of 1975 regulations
The first point take
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.