The court affirmed that s 51A of the CPC does not apply to inquest proceedings, and that applications for document disclosure can be made under s 51, with disclosure generally favoring interested parties.

Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid JC:

Matter Before This Court

[1] This an application for a revision of the decision of the Coroner made on 9 March 2021 ("Application"). This Application was made vide a letter dated 10 March 2021 issued by the applicants' counsel, Messrs Saibullah MV Nathan & Co ("Counsel").

Background

[2] One Mohd Fadzrin Zaidi ("Deceased") had passed away on 22 November 2019 at approximately 3.20 AM whilst in police custody at the lock-up of the District Police Headquarters Seberang Perai Utara, Penang. The Deceased was the son to both the applicants. Following a report of sudden death, the Sessions Court Judge acting in the capacity as Coroner ordered an inquest ("Inquest") to be established pursuant to s 334 of the Criminal Procedure Code (" CPC ") and for the purpose as provided under s 337 of the .

[3] Section 334 of the CPC read as follows:

"When any person dies while in the custody of the police or in a psychiatric hospital or prison, the officer who had the custody of that person or was in charge of that psychiatric hospital or prison, as the case may be, shall immediately give intimation of such death to the nearest Magistrate, and the Magistrate or some other Magistrate shall, in the case of a death in the custody of the police, and in other cases may, if he thinks expedient, hold an inquiry into the cause of death."

[4] Section 337 of the CPC provides as follows:

A Magistrate holding an inquiry shall inquire when, where, how and after what manner the deceased came by his death and also whether any person is criminally concerned in the cause of the death.

Proceedings Leading To The Application

[5] Before the Inquest proceedings commencecorod, Counsel had on 4 January 2021 applied to the Coroner in the capacity as lawyers appointed to watch brief the Inquest proceedings on behalf of the applicants, for the disclosure and delivery of relevant documents that will enable the applicants as interested persons to effectively observe the Inquest proceedings and assist the Court whenever possible through examination of witnesses. By definition under Parts B and C (p 5) LAMPIRAN A (GUIDELINES ON INQUEST) as annexed to the ARAHAN AMALAN BIL 2 TAHUN 2014, PENGENDALIAN SIASATAN KEMATIAN (DEATH INQUIRY) SELARAS DENGAN PENUBUHAN MAHKAMAH KORONER ("Arahan"), the applicants are 'interested persons'. The application was made premised on the provision of s 51A of the CPC .

[6] That application was opposed by the Deputy Public Prosecutor acting as Assisting Officer on the grounds that s 51A of the CPC did not apply to an inquest proceeding.

[7] After hearing parties, the Coroner finally decided on 9 March 2021 that s 51A of the CPC did not apply to an inquest proceeding and consequently denied the applicants' request for disclosure of documents. That denial leads to the Application being made to this Court.

[8] This Application seeks to move this Court to exercise its powers of revision to set aside the decision of the Coroner in denying the disclosure of documents and consequently order the disclosure of documents relevant to the Inquest.

The Application

[9] The applicants raised the following arguments to justify the exercise of this Court's power of revision to set aside of the Coroner's decision:

(a) that ss 51 and 51A of the CPC read together with Part D at p 5 of the Arahan favour the disclosure of documents to interested persons;

(b) that the disclosure of documents is necessary to allow the interested persons to effectively observe the inquest proceedings and assist the Coroner through the examination of witnesses as allowed under Parts B and C at p 5 of the Arahan;

(c) that the early disclosure of documents prior to the commencement of the Inquest hearing is necessary to provide sufficient time to the interested persons to study the documents in anticipation of participating in the inquest through the examination of witnesses; and

(d) that there could not be any prejudice or embarrassment caused by disclosure of docum