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

2025 MarsdenLR 4005

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PP – Appellant
Versus
KANNAN LETCHUMANAN – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Mohd Fairuz Johari ,Respondent Advocate: Shivdev Singh,Kaladevi Chandrasekaran

JUDGMENT

Faizah Jamaludin JCA:

A. This Appeal

[1] The respondent was acquitted, and discharged of all charges against him, by the Ipoh High Court on 15 May 2024, from a conviction by the Ipoh Magistrates' Special Traffic Court on one charge under s 45A(1) of the Road Transport Act 1987 ("RTA") for driving a motor vehicle with alcohol above the prescribed limit.

[2] The learned High Court Judge's acquittal of the respondent was premised on his interpretation that the breath test under s 45B(1) RTA is "an initial breath test", which if positive, makes it mandatory for the investigating officer to request the accused to provide two specimens of his breath or a specimen of blood or urine under s 45C(1) RTA.

[3] The High Court held that the respondent's conviction was unsafe because the investigating officer did not request the respondent for two specimens of his breath, or specimens of his blood or urine under s 45C(1) RTA.

[4] Dissatisfied with the High Court 's acquittal of the respondent, the appellant in his Notice of Appeal had appealed against the whole of the decision of the High Court . However, during the hearing of this appeal, the learned Deputy Public Prosecutor ("DPP")

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