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

1998 MarsdenLR 2651

AUGUSTINE PAUL
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Appellant
Versus
ISMAIL BIN IBRAHIM – Respondent


Advocates:
Maziah bte Abu (Deputy Public Prosecutor) for the appellant.
Vanaja (A Rengganathan & Co) for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

The original charge preferred against the accused in this case in the magistrate's court at Melaka is as follows:

Bahawa kamu pada 6 Julai 1997 jam lebih kurang 7.25 pagi, di Batu 5 Lorong Sidang Hassan Bukit Katil Melaka, di dalam Daerah Melaka Tengah, di Negeri Melaka, telah melakukan rompakan ke atas Dengkil bte Taib KP3715812, dengan itu melakukan kesalahan di bawah s 392 Kanun Keseksaan dan boleh dihukum di bawah peruntukan yang sama.

On 11 July 1997 when the accused appeared in court to answer the charge made against him, the prosecuting officer informed the court that there is reason to believe that the accused is not of sound mind and prayed that he be sent to a hospital for observation. The learned magistrate, in accordance with the provisions of s 342(iii) of the Criminal Procedure Code (FMS Cap 6) ('the CPC') ordered that the accused be sent for observation to a mental hospital for a period of one month in order to determine whether he is capable of making his defence. On 11 August 1997, the period of observation was extended for another one month on the application of the hospital authorities. On 10 September 1997, the prosecuting officer informed the court tha

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