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

2005 MarsdenLR 1776

COURT OF APPEAL , PUTRAJAYA
PP – Appellant
Versus
RAJISEGAR MUNISAMY – Respondent


JUDGMENT

(Oral)

Gopal Sri Ram JCA:-

This is the judgment of the court.

On 25 January this year, an incident took place in Subang Jaya. It concerned an assault by one road user on another, resulting in the death of the latter. It is what we now commonly call a case of road rage.

The respondent in this appeal was arrested. Investigations commenced.

On 4 February 2005, the respondent was produced before the magistrate at the Petaling Jaya Magistrate court. The investigation diary relevant to this case was made available to the magistrate. Based on the grounds appearing therein, the learned magistrate acting under s. 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code ("the Code") , granted the police a period of 13 days to hold the respondent in remand under police custody.

The respondent's solicitor was unhappy with this result. He wrote to the judge in Shah Alam. A few days later, the learned judicial commissioner acting in revision, called for the record of the proceedings. Having examined it, she came to a conclusion that the remand of 13 days was defective and she reduced the remand period to 11 days.

The respondent now faces a charge of murder under s. 302 of the Penal Code .

This appeal is, strictly spe

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