SARAVANAN RAJAGOPAL & ANOR vs PP

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 MarsdenLR 665

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
SARAVANAN RAJAGOPAL & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Hisham Nazir ,Respondent Advocate: Norinna Bahadun

Table of Content
1. charges and motivation in context of murder. (Para 1 , 2 , 6 , 9)
2. the foundation of the murder charges was established through eyewitness testimonies and physical evidence. (Para 4 , 7)
3. evidence of injuries and subsequent conclusions. (Para 22 , 54 , 80)
4. defence claims and judicial assessment. (Para 41 , 70)
5. credibility of witnesses was evaluated, with emphasis on their reliability in establishing facts. (Para 84 , 91)
6. final conclusion and ruling. (Para 93)

[1] The appellants were charged individually on separate dates, with two different case numbers, with the murder of the deceased, one Gobinathan a/l Kumaravellu, under s 302 of the Penal Code (' PC ') read with s 34 of the same. The charge against each of them were identical.

[2] On the application of the learned Deputy Public Prosecutor ('DPP'), the charges against both the appellants were heard together. The charge (as against the 1st appellant) reads:

"Bahawa kamu, bersama-sama (1) rakan bernama Ganesan a/I Kupusamy No KP 700217-08-5293 pada 5 Julai 2015 jam lebih kurang 12.00 fengah hari hingga 1.00 petang di beiakang Restoren Nashmeer, Laiuan Klebang Restu 2, Medan Klebang Restu, Chemor, Ipoh, Pe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 MarsdenLR 665

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYASARAVANAN RAJAGOPAL & ANOR – AppellantVersusPP – Respondent

Cases Referred (2)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
SARAVANAN RAJAGOPAL & ANOR – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent