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

2002 MarsdenLR 184

HIGH COURT, KOTA KINABALU
A JUVENILE – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent


JUDGMENT

IanChin J:

Two juveniles were charged with the theft of a motor vehicle, an offence under s. 379A of the Penal Code and they both pleaded guilty. A probation report was tendered and the two advisers were of the view that both the juveniles should be sent to the Henry Gurney School for a period of three years. On 17 April 2001, the magistrate made an order of detention for three years. The present appeal is by the second juvenile who has no parents and his known relative could not afford to come to Kota Kinabalu from Sandakan. A stay of the order was only granted on 3 January 2002 after he had served the detention order for about seven months already. He has since obtained the service of an advocate to argue his appeal against the detention order.

The first ground of appeal was that, the magistrate of the first class has no jurisdiction over the matter as only a Sessions Court judge can sit in a Juvenile Court in view of s. 111 of the Subordinate Courts Act 1948 which provided the substitution of any reference in any written law passed before 1 June 1981 to a magistrate of the first class with a President of a Sessions Court and that consequently only a Sessions Court judge ca

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