In this case, the three respondents were produced at the Magistrate’s Court, Ipoh on 14.10.2004 on a tentative charge, an offence of murder punishable under Section 302 of the Penal Code. The tentative charge against the first and second respondents which was registered at the Magistrate’s Court, Ipoh vide Case No: KT 81 – 30 – 04 is as follows:-

“Bahawa kamu bersama-sama, pada 08/02/2003 jam lebih kurang 2.00 petang, bertempat di rumah no. 35, Laluan Pengkalan Barat 6, Taman Puteri Lindungan Bulan, Pasir Puteh, Ipoh didalam daerah Kinta, dalam Negeri Perak Darul Ridzuan dalam mencapai niat bersama, telah melakukan pembunuhan dengan menyebabkan kematian ke atas Sa’adiah bte. Wahid, KPT: 660320-08-7066, umur 37 tahun dan oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan kesalahan yang boleh dihukum dibawah Seksyen 302 Kanun Keseksaan dibaca bersama Seksyen 34 Kanun yang sama.”

As against the third respondent, the charge which was registered at the Magistrate’s Court vide Case No: KT 81 – 31 – 04 is as follows:-

“Bahawa Mohd Shaifuldin b. Khairudin dan Abdul Rahim b. Mohd Ali telah pada 08/02/2003 jam lebih kurang 2.00 petang, bertempat di rumah no. 35, Laluan Pengkalan Barat 6, Taman Puteri Lindungan Bulan, Pasir Puteh, Ipoh didalam daerah Kinta, dalam Negeri Perak Darul Ridzuan telah melakukan pembunuhan keatas Sa’adiah bte. Wahid, KPT: 660320-08-7066, umur 37 dan bahawa kamu telah bersubahat dengan Mohd Shaifuldin b. Khairudin dan Abdul Rahim b. Mohd Ali didalam melakukan kesalahan bunuh tersebut, yang mana kesalahan bunuh tersebut dilakukan akibat dari persubahatan kamu dan oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan kesalahan yang boleh dihukum dibawah seksyen 109 Kanun Keseksaan dan seksyen 302 Kanun yang sama.”

As the learned Magistrate has no jurisdiction to try the charge which was an offence of murder, no plea was taken from the respondents and the learned Magistrate on 14.10.2004 ordered the respondents to be remanded at the prison on the application of the prosecuting officer on the ground that the DNA report has not been obtained as yet by the Investigating Agency. She then fixed a date for mention on 5.11.2004 pending the consent of the Public Prosecutor as provided under Section 177A of the Criminal Procedure Code for the case to be transmitted to the High Court, Ipoh for trial.

On 5.11.2004 when the case came up again for mention, the prosecuting officer informed the court that the DNA report was not ready as yet and the Investigation Agency required more time to obtain the said report and applied for a further mention date pending the DNA report. The learned Magistrate fixed a further mention date to 6.12.2004. At this stage, it is important to state the chronology of the proceedings at the Magistrate’s Court, Ipoh which had resulted in the Magistrate having granted a Discharge Not Amounting To An Acquittal on 18.7.2005 in favour of the respondents.

CHRONOLOGY OF PROCEEDINGS AT THE MAGISTRATE’S COURT