Syed Ahmad Idid J:

Preliminary point

The respondent's Counsel raised an issue in respect of the aggrieved party i.e. the applicant. Was it the public prosecutor as stated in the "Usul"? The learned DPP conceded that the applicant should be the police with reference to s. 117 Criminal Procedure Code (CPC). Accordingly the correction is made.

Through "Notis Usul"

This application is for the revision of the order made by the Registrar of the Magistrates' Courts, which order released the respondent from police custody. The Registrar had, on 12 May 1994, stated that the arrest of the respondent was made without a warrant and that the suspect (or respondent here) was not told of the reasons for her detention.

The Public Prosecutor through the Deputy Public Prosecutor Encik Zainal Adzam bin Abdul Ghani, in his 18-page submission made streneous efforts to back the actions earlier taken by the police.

At this stage, the respondent is not tried nor has she been charged for any offence in a Court of law. The two issues here are (a) whether her "arrest" (or tangkapan) and "detention" by the police (or the Commercial Crime Investigation Division) purportedly made on 11 May 1994 at a