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

1979 MarsdenLR 192

SYED OTHMAN
HUSDI – Appellant
Versus
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Respondent


Advocates:
For the applicant - Sri Ram For the respondent - Mohamed Shafee bin Mohamed Abdullah; DPP

JUDGMENT

Syed Othman FJ:

The petitioner was charged with another in the Sessions Court at Kuala Lumpur with offences of house breaking by night under s. 457 of the Penal Code. He first appeared before the Court in September 1978. He engaged Counsel in October 1978 who then application to the Deputy Public Prosecutor for copies of the cautioned statement made by the petitioner to the police and of the statements recorded by the police from witnesses in the course of investigation (which for brevity I shall call police statements). The Deputy Public Prosecutor denied the request. When the case came up on 25 October 1978, Counsel applied to the Court for an order directing the prosecution to supply the petitioner with copies of the statements. The learned president dismissed the application. The petitioner now seeks revision of the dismissal.

Before me, the petitioner only pursues the application for copies of police statements. The application for the cautioned statement has been withdrawn as on the day of hearing the arguments, I indicated that the Lord President was dealing with a similar application in another criminal case and would be giving his opinion soon. The Lord President

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