Wong Teck Meng JC:

GROUNDS OF JUDGMENT INTRODUCTION

[1]These are appeals by both the parties of the case. In this case, Sellvam and Kirubanantharaj (collectively called the Appellants) were found guilty and convicted under section 326 Penal Code (PC) by the Sessions Court Judge (SCJ) and they were sentenced to imprisonment for a term of eight (8) years.

[2]The charges against the Appellants read as follow: -

Sellvam a/l Sangaralingam:

“Bahawa kamu pada 29.8.2013 jam lebih kurang 5.00 petang, di rumah setinggan, Jalan PJS 7/2, Bandar Sunway, dalam Daerah Petaling, dalam Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan, telah didapati dengan sengaja menyebabkan cedera parah terhadap (1) lelaki melayu nama Muhammad Adni Bin Isa (no. k/p: 710918-04-5373) dengan menetak tangan sebelah kiri penama dengan menggunakan parang panjang. Oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan yang boleh dihukum dibawah seksyen 326 Kanun Keseksaan.”

Kirubanantharaj a/l Sellvam:

“Bahawa kamu bersama-sama Sellvam a/l Sangaralingam (no k/p: 680510-08-6687) pada 29.8.2013 jam lebih kurang 5.00 petang, di rumah setinggan, Jalan PJS 7/2, Bandar Sunway, dalam Daerah Petaling, dalam Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan, telah didapati dengan sengaja menyebabkan cedera parah terhadap (1) lelaki melayu nama Muhammad Adni Bin Isa (no. k/p: 710918-04-5373) dengan menetak tangan sebelah kiri penama dengan menggunakan parang panjang. Oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan yang boleh dihukum dibawah seksyen 326 Kanun Keseksaan dan dibaca bersama seksyen 34 Kanun Keseksaan.”

[3]Dissatisfied with the Session Court Judge’s (SCJ) decision, the Appellants appealed against the conviction and sentence imposed by the SCJ. At the same time, the Prosecution appealed against the sentence imposed by the SCJ. In this appeal, this Court dismissed the Appellants’ appeal and maintained the conviction ordered by the SCJ. The sentence of eight years’ imprisonment imposed on Kirubanantharaj was enhanced to eleven years’ imprisonment and four strokes of whipping. Kirubanantharaj being dissatisfied with the decision made by this Court appealed to the Court of Appeal. I now give the grounds of my decision in relation to Kirubanantharaj’s appeal. At the outset, the facts of the case are as follow.

FACTS OF THE CASE

[4]On 29/8/2013 at around 5.00pm, three technicians from the Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB) office; Mohd Fuad bin Ishak (PW4), Shahrul Afrizan bin Daai (PW5) and Muhammad Adni b Isa (PW7) went to a squatter house located at Jalan PJS 7 Petaling Jaya (the premise) to cut off the electricity supply to the premise. PW7 who was also the victim was attacked and was injured by the Appellants before the cutting of the electricity supply.

[5]According to PW7, there was an illegal usage of electricity at the premise which warranted the cutting of the electricity supply to the premise and a notice to cut off the electricity supply to the premise (D11) was given. On the day of the incident, PW7 was explaining to Sellvam that his team would be cutting off the electricity supply to the premise. Soon after the PW7’s explanation, five Indian men came out from the premise with parang knives, a golf stick and a black truncheon held in their hands. PW7 further stated that the Appellants came up to him and they each held a parang knife in their hands.

[6]PW7 panicked and leaned on his car while the Appellants continued shouting at PW7 and pointing their parang knives at him. Not long after that, the Appellants started to attack PW7 by chopping and slashing PW7’s hands with the parang knives held in their hands. PW7 was able to identify the Appellants as the two Indian men who attacked him at the premise during the incident. He stated that he could identify the Appellants because he went to the premise twice before the incident for inspections. During the inspection, he had seen both the Appellants.

[7]PW7 was hospitalized for approximately thirty-four days in Pantai Hospital Kuala Lumpur and he underwent five to