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

1977 MarsdenLR 211

WAN SULEIMAN, RAJA AZLAN SHAH, SUFFIAN
JOHNSON TAN HAN SENG – Appellant
Versus
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Respondent


JUDGMENT

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

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