Identification evidence from credible eyewitnesses and corroborative material can establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, regardless of procedural flaws in identification processes.

[1]The accused was charged under section 392section 397Penal Code

“Bahawa kamu pada 01/07/2016 jam lebih kurang 04.25 petang di premis No. 5 Jalan 4/93 Taman Miharja 2 Cheras, di dalam Daerah Cheras, dalam Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur, Wilayah Persekutuan telah melakukan rompak bersenjata parang ke atas penama Wong Hung Fai No KP: 860210-56-5051 dan Lee Kit Wai No KP: 970207-14-5897 dengan melarikan wang tunai RM20,000.00 milik Syarikat Extreme Net. Oleh yang demikian kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan di bawah Seksyen 392397Kanun Keseksaan

[2]To this charge, the accused pleaded not guilty.

BACKGROUND FACTS

[3]Based on the evidence adduced, on 1.7.2016 at about 4.20pm, Wong Hung Fai (PW1) went to the cyber cafe at no. 5, 4/93 Taman Miharja, Cheras to meet his friend Lee Kit Wai (PW6), who worked at the cyber cafe. At the main entrance of the premises, the accused was seen in front of PW1. The accused entered the said premises and followed by PW1. Subsequently, PW1 went to the right to meet PW6, who was then at the counter situated in the small room of the premises, whereas the accused was heading towards the left.

[4]PW1 wanted to go into the room after the door was opened by PW6, but the accused made a turn and headed back to him. The accused took out a parang and pointed it at PW1 before directing him to enter the room. In the room, the accused threatened PW1 and PW6 while asking them to take out all the money that they had. Out of fear, PW1 and PW6 handed over the money to the accused. Later on, the accused asked PW1 and PW6 to enter the toilet situated to the left of the room before he fled from the premises.

PROSECUTION CASE

[5]The prosecution called 6 witnesses to prove the charge against the accused. The list of witnesses is as follows:

[6]The exhibits tendered during the prosecution case are as follows:

[7]To establish the charge, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt these ingredients:

(a)the accused committed theft;

(b)the accused caused or attempted to cause death, hurt or wrongful restraint or fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restraint to any person;

(c)that he did so in committing such theft or in order to commit the theft or in carrying away or attempting to carry away the property obtained by such theft;

(d)the accused used a deadly weapon or caused grievous hurt or attempted to cause death or grievous hurt to any person; and

(e)that he did so at the time of committing or attempting to commit the robbery.

[8]The relevant provisions in the Penal Code are reproduced below for ease of reference.

“390. Robbery

(1)In all robbery there is either theft or extortion.

(2)Theft is “robbery”, if, in order to commit theft, or in committing the theft, or in carrying away or attempting to carry away property obtained by the theft, the offender, for that end, voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death, or hurt, or wrongful restraint, or fear of instant death, or of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint.

(3)Extortion is “robbery”, if the offender, at the time of committing the extortion, is in the presence of the person put in fear and commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death, of instant hurt, or of instant wrongful restraint to that person or to some other person, and, by so putting in fear, induces the person so put in fear then and there to deliver up the thing extorted.”

392. Punishment for robbery

“Whoever commits robbery shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to fourteen years, and he shall also be liable to fine or to whipping