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

1954 MarsdenLR 4

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ABDUL KARIM – Appellant
Versus
REGINA; SUNDRA SINGH – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:David Marshall ,Respondent Advocate: DG Osborne Jones

JUDGMENT

Brown AG CJ:

[1] These three appeals were heard on the same day, and it will be convenient to deal with them together. In each case the appellant was convicted inter alia of driving under the influence of drink, contrary to s 27(1) of the Road Traffic Ordinance, 1941. In each case the appellant was sentenced to three months imprisonment on that charge. Each case had been tried by the same Magistrate and in each case the learned Magistrate had expressed, in his Grounds of Decision, the serious view which he took of this type of offence. In each case I upheld the convictions but the sentences of imprisonment were quashed and fines were substituted.

48

[2] In the matter of punishment, the "type of offence" is the concern of the Legislature, which has provided the maximum punishment which can be inflicted for a serious offence of that type. The particular offence, and the particular offender, are the concern of the Court, whose business it is to decide what punishment is merited upon the facts of the individual case within the limits which the Legislature has provided. Any tendency to standardise punishment for any type of offence is to be deplored because it means that the indivi

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