Back
SESSIONS COURT (KUALA LUMPUR)
GAN CHEE KEONG, J
Public Prosecutor – Appellant
Versus
Mohd Aizuddin bin Khamis – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. identification evidence demands credibility. (Para 3 , 4 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. prosecution calls witnesses to establish charge. (Para 5 , 6 , 12) |
| 3. cctv corroborates witness accounts. (Para 9 , 19) |
| 4. defence arguments based on procedural defects. (Para 24 , 26) |
| 5. alibi cannot prevail over positive identification. (Para 35 , 45) |
| 6. conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 46) |
[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
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
