Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
In legal proceedings, courts often examine whether the damage amount and act meet the criteria for Section 427, and whether the charge was properly framed and supported by evidence ["PP vs KANNAN MANOGARAN - 2020 MarsdenLR 2237"], ["CHANTIKA KELANG BERAS SDN BHD vs PADIBERAS NASIONAL BERHAD - 2019 MarsdenLR 2236"].
Analysis and Conclusion:
References:- ["PP vs KANNAN MANOGARAN - 2020 MarsdenLR 2237"]- ["PP vs WONG TOO SANG - High Court"]- ["CHANTIKA KELANG BERAS SDN BHD vs PADIBERAS NASIONAL BERHAD - 2019 MarsdenLR 2236"]- ["MALAYAN BANKING BHD vs PRABANAH MANOGARAN SULTAN - 2021 MarsdenLR 2073"]- ["ASM DEVELOPMENT SDN BHD vs TENAGA NASIONAL BERHAD - 2022 MarsdenLR 2035"]
If you've ever wondered, what is section 427 penal code Malaysia?, you're not alone. This question often arises in contexts involving property disputes, criminal complaints, or legal research into Malaysian criminal law. Malaysia's Penal Code, modeled closely on the Indian Penal Code of 1860, addresses various offences, and Section 427 typically deals with mischief causing damage to property valued at a certain threshold. However, legal documents analyzed may not always provide direct Malaysian-specific interpretations, focusing instead on similar provisions in related jurisdictions. This post breaks down the available insights, case examples, and implications based on reviewed sources.
Section 427 of the Penal Code punishes mischief where the damage caused amounts to a specified value—historically fifty rupees in the original code, adapted to twenty-five ringgit in Malaysia. Mischief itself is defined under Section 425 as intentionally or knowingly causing wrongful loss or damage to property. While primary documents reviewed do not explicitly detail Malaysia's version, cross-references indicate its application in cases of deliberate property harm. For instance:
This highlights that mere negligence or indirect effects (e.g., heavy rains) do not suffice; intent is key KARIM BUX VS REX THROUGH KARIMULLAH - 1950 Supreme(All) 35.
A thorough review of key legal references reveals a notable gap: none explicitly mention or analyze Section 427 of the Penal Code Malaysia. Instead, discussions center on Section 427 of the Indian Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), which governs whether sentences run concurrently or consecutively M. R. Kudva VS State Of A. P. - 2006 8 Supreme 1011Chandran VS State of Kerala - 2020 0 Supreme(SC) 436Benson VS State of Kerala - 2016 7 Supreme 485. For example:
This distinction is crucial—Penal Code Section 427 (substantive offence) differs from Cr.P.C. Section 427 (procedural sentencing). No Malaysian Penal Code content appears in these core documents, limiting direct explanations PP vs KANNAN MANOGARAN - 2020 MarsdenLR 2237.
Additional sources provide practical illustrations of Section 427 under Penal Codes akin to Malaysia's (as Malaysia's code mirrors the Indian framework, with similarities noted in other jurisdictions like Singapore, Pakistan, and Malaysia for certain sections H. S. Bedi VS National Highway Authority of India - 2016 Supreme(Del) 323). These cases predominantly interpret Section 427 as mischief:
Other mentions include police registrations under Sections 353, 332, 427, and 186 for assaults and obstructions Diwakar Maniram Kohale VS State of Maharastra - 2009 Supreme(Bom) 1669, and non-sustenance of convictions under Section 427 alongside others PRAMOD BHUIYAN vs STATE OF BIHAR.
Malaysia's Penal Code shares roots with the Indian Penal Code, extending to sections like 209 in Malaysia, Singapore, Pakistan, etc. H. S. Bedi VS National Highway Authority of India - 2016 Supreme(Del) 323. Thus, Section 427's focus on mischief likely parallels: imprisonment up to two years, fine, or both for damage above the threshold. However, exact Malaysian text requires official statutes, as documents here are India-centric.
To establish an offence under Section 427, prosecutors typically need:- Intentional act causing wrongful loss/damage (per Section 425).- Damage value meeting the threshold (RM25+ in Malaysia).- Direct causation, not incidental events KARIM BUX VS REX THROUGH KARIMULLAH - 1950 Supreme(All) 35.
In Malaysia, this section applies to everyday disputes like vandalism, crop destruction, or minor arsons. Police may invoke it alongside others (e.g., trespass). Courts exercise discretion, akin to sentencing principles in related docs Chandran VS State of Kerala - 2020 0 Supreme(SC) 436. Note: Ranbir Penal Code cases (J&K) mention it similarly Assadullah Sheikh VS State of J&K - 2019 Supreme(J&K) 87, reinforcing consistency.
Disclaimer: This analysis draws from provided legal documents and is for informational purposes only. Malaysian law may have nuances; consult a qualified lawyer or official gazettes for advice. It generally outlines trends, not definitive rulings.
While direct Malaysian explanations of Section 427 Penal Code are absent from core documents—which focus on Indian Cr.P.C. sentencing—supplementary cases portray it as punishing mischief with significant property damageKARIM BUX VS REX THROUGH KARIMULLAH - 1950 Supreme(All) 35BHAGWANA VS STATE OF U. P. THROUGH GANGA RAM - 1951 Supreme(All) 158RAGHUNATH SINGH VS STATE - 1950 Supreme(All) 55. Essential takeaways:- Intent and direct damage are pivotal.- Distinguish from procedural sections like Cr.P.C. 427 M. R. Kudva VS State Of A. P. - 2006 8 Supreme 1011.- Seek primary sources for Malaysia: Penal Code Act 574.- Prevention tips: Document property disputes early; avoid self-help remedies.
For accurate application, refer to Malaysian authorities or legal experts. Stay informed on evolving interpretations!
References (selected):- M. R. Kudva VS State Of A. P. - 2006 8 Supreme 1011, Chandran VS State of Kerala - 2020 0 Supreme(SC) 436, Benson VS State of Kerala - 2016 7 Supreme 485, BHAGWANA VS STATE OF U. P. THROUGH GANGA RAM - 1951 Supreme(All) 158, KARIM BUX VS REX THROUGH KARIMULLAH - 1950 Supreme(All) 35, RAGHUNATH SINGH VS STATE - 1950 Supreme(All) 55, H. S. Bedi VS National Highway Authority of India - 2016 Supreme(Del) 323, Srikant VS State of U. P. - 2021 Supreme(All) 519.
#PenalCodeMalaysia, #Section427, #MischiefLaw
(A) Penal Code – Section 427 and Section 472 – Criminal Procedure Code – Section 323 – Application for revision of sentence – The ... 6, 13, and 18) ... ... Facts of the case: The respondent was initially sentenced to six months imprisonment for an offense under Section ... 427 of the Penal Code but the learned Magistrate later realized that this sentence was incorrect as it did not align with the statutory ... The respondent was charged under s 427 of the Penal Code....
(A) Penal Code – Section 427 – Criminal Procedure Code – Section 173A(2)(a) – Accused pleaded guilty to mischief causing damage to ... The court found that the accused had fulfilled the requirements of s 427 of the Penal Code, which involves causing damage to a vehicle to the amount of RM25 or upwards. ... Nhizam bin Jalar (Criminal Revision Application No JA-43-7-02/2024) by YA Dato' Abu Bakar, HCJ, where the statement of the facts of that case did not state the exact amount of loss for the purpose of ....
On a report by Mirkhurshid Ali, the police registered offences punishable under Sections 353, 332 and 427 of the Penal Code and seem to have also added offence punishable under Section 186 of the Penal Code. ... In fact it is addition of Section 186 of the Penal Code by the police which has resulted in this mischief. As rightly submitted by the learned APP, it would have to be examined as to whether the offence punishable under #HL_....
The Sessions Judge upheld the conviction under Section 323 and Section 24 but set aside the conviction under Section 427. ... 427, Penal Code, was not made out. ... jurisdiction of the Panchayati Adalat and concluded that the case was not cognizable by the Panchayati Adalat, as the charge under Section ... In appeal the learned Sessions Judge upheld the conviction under Section 323, Penal Code, and section 24, Cattle Trespass Act, but set aside the c....
427 Cr.P.C., 1973 and applied the principles of section 427 Cr.P.C., 1973 to the present case. ... Consequently, the Court granted the benefit of section 427 Cr.P.C., 1973 and directed the sentences to run concurrently. ... The benefit of section 427 Cr.P.C., 1973 was granted to the applicant/appellant and consequently the sentences under section 376 ... However, while taking into consideration the legislative intent, interpretation of penal statute ....
The applicant was convicted under Section 427, Penal Code. ... Therefore, no offence under Section 427, Penal Code was made out. ... Finding of the Court: The court found that no offence under Section 427, Penal Code was made out as the damage was ... I am, therefore, of opinion that no offence under Section 427, Penal Code is made out against the applicant. ... ... ( 2 ) I am of opinion that on the facts found,....
427 of the Penal Code. ... Case: The appellants were charged with dacoity under Section 395 of the Penal Code but were convicted of mischief under Section ... Section 427, Penal Code, as they were not (?) ... had thereby committed mischief, an offence punishable Under Section 427, Penal Code. ... Babban Lal has filed a revision praying that the conviction of the appellants be altered from one Under Secti....
So far as the conviction of the appellant under Section 427 of the Penal Code or Section 504 of the Penal Code is concerned, we find it very difficult indeed to sustain the 504 of the Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 448 of the Penal Code. ... As such it may be a case under Section 304 part II of the Penal#H....
The learned Magistrate did not find the charge under section 427, proved and acquitted the applicants, but he convicted them under Sections. 352 and 447, Penal Code, and fixed them. ... It is not disputed that in the present case the Magistrate having found the applicant not guilty under Section 427, Penal Code, the other two charges that remained were under Sections 352 and 447, and these are charges triable by the Panchayati adalat. ... ... ( 2 ) ....
The meaning of the word " offence " in section 427 of the Penal Code is defined in section 38 as denoting a thing punishable in Ceylon under the Penal Code, or a thing punishable under any other law with imprisonment for a term of six months or upwards, whether with or without fine. ... Gemming without a license on the bank of a river flowing along the property of a private owner is not punishable as criminal trespass under section #HL_START....
Sub-Section (4) of this section, however, says “Nothing contained in this section shall affect the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 71.” 25. Section 71 of the Penal Code, is in these words: “Where anything which is an offence is made up of parts, any of which parts is itself an offence, the offender shall not be punished with the punishment of more than one of such his offences, unless it be so expressly provided. Where anything is an offence falling within two or more separate definitions of any Law in force for the time being by which offences are defined or punished.
9. The word “mischief” has been defined under Section 2 (a) as having the same meaning as in the Section 425 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Penal Code]. For ready reference Section 425 of the Penal Code is being extracted below:-
6. Perusal of the material before me reveals that has been shown involved in FIR No.15/2018 registered at Police Station Devsar for commission of offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 336, 341, 427 and FIR No.36/2018 P/S Devsar under Section 148, 149, 341, 336, 427 Ranbir Penal code.
Firstly prosecution has to prove the essential ingredients of Section 498-A Ranbir Penal code and only thereafter Section 306 of Ranbir Penal code is applicable. Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty, Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine. Section 498-A Ranbir Penal code is reproduced as under:-
In Bachoo Mohan Singh v. Public Prosecutor (2010) SGCA 25, the Singapore Supreme Court exhaustively examined the scope of Section 209 of the Singapore Penal Code, which is similar to Section 209 of Indian Penal Code. (Emphasis supplied) 9. Comparative analysis of law in other countries. 9.1. Section 209 of Penal Code of Singapore, Pakistan, Malaysia, Myanmar and Brunei are same as Section 209 of the Indian Penal Code.
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
