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

2025 MarsdenLR 6563

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Appellant
Versus
SYED MUHAMAD FAYSAL BIN SYED IBRAHIM – Respondent


VT Singham J:

1 In this case, the charge against the ‘penama’ (‘the accused’) is as follows: Bahawa kamu pada di antara jam lebih kurang 2.30 petang 13.02.2001 hingga jam lebih kurang 7.15 petang 14.02.2001 di dalam longkang besar di bawah jambatan, jalan masuk ke Kampung Tersusun Batu 2, Jalan lama Bidor, Tapah di dalam Daerah Batang Padang di dalam Negeri Perak Darul Ridzuan, telah melakukan pembunuhan dengan melibatkan kematian seorang bernama FARRAH DEEBA BT RUSTAM KP NO 840129-08-6776 dan oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan yang boleh dihukum di bawah Seksyen 302 Kanun Keseksaan .

2 The accused was 16 years 10 months and 24 days of age at the time of the offence alleged against him on 13 February 2001. He was 19 years four months and 16 days at the time of the trial hich commenced on 5 August 2003.

3 The prosecution introduced evidence through 15 witnesses to testify in support of the charge against the accused and had relied on circumstantial evidence, scientific and medical evidence. As for the scientific and medical evidence, the two chemist, namely, Mr Ng Chang Chai (PW13) and Mr Lim Kong Boon (PW14) and a forensic pathologist, Dr Mohd Shah Bin Mahmud (

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