Spenser Wilkinson J:

Before I deal with the merits of this case I should like to deal with Ground (c) of the Grounds of Appeal. There is one passage in the judgment in the case of Mohamed Yatin v. PP [1950] MLJ 57; [1950] I MLR 7 which seems to have caused some difficulty. It is as follows:

In an ordinary case, where no special burden of proof or explanation is by law cast upon the accused, his position is more favourable than it is in those cases where the law presumes something against him.

I think that this sentence should be understood as referring back to the earlier part of the previous paragraph where it is stated that in certain cases "the accused discharges the burden upon him if he establishes a balance of probability in his favour". I think this makes it clear what the second passage means.

There are really three classes of criminal cases to be considered:

(a) The ordinary case where direct or circumstantial evidence is given to prove that the accused committed the offence charged. In such cases if the defence raises a reasonable doubt as to the truth of the prosecution case or as to the accused's guilt there will be an acquittal, and if no such doubt is rai