Yew Huoi, How & Associates | Leading Malaysia Law Firm

Menu

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE— SENTENCING— HARSH PENALTIES IN VIOLENT CRIMES: A LEGAL EXAMINATION OF SENTENCING STANDARDS

ILLUSTRATIVE SCENARIO

Two accused individuals received heavy sentences for their involvement in violent crimes during a home invasion. The primary accused was sentenced to 22 years in prison and 12 strokes of the rotan for gang robbery with murder, while the second accused received 12 years and ten strokes for voluntarily causing harm.

KEY LEGAL ISSUES

  • Consecutive Sentences: The appropriateness of ordering the jail sentences to run consecutively, given that the offences were committed against different victims during the same criminal act.
  • Impact of Long Sentences: The consideration of public interest in imposing long jail terms, which may compromise the accused’s prospects for rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
  • Proportionality of Sentences: Whether the combined sentences of imprisonment and whipping are commensurate with the violent nature of the crimes.

LAWS & LEGAL PRINCIPLES

  • S.183A Criminal Procedure Code: This section allows for a victim impact statement to be made before sentencing, providing the court insights into the emotional and physical impact on the victims or their families.
  • Kidnapping Act 1961: Outlines severe penalties for abduction and wrongful restraint, reflecting the serious nature of these crimes and the intent of the law to serve as a deterrent.
  • Sentencing Guidelines: For the primary charge, the appellants faced a potential death sentence or up to 30 years in prison along with mandatory whipping. The secondary charge carried a penalty of up to 20 years and additional whipping.

APPLICATION TO SCENARIO

  • The crimes occurred during a planned home invasion in Bintulu in May 2014.
  • The court noted that the appellants, along with accomplices still at large, prepared a week in advance, employing disguises and weapons to execute the robbery.
  • The male victim was murdered when he responded to his wife’s screams, who was also injured in the ordeal.
  • Despite their guilty pleas, the court determined that the severity of the crimes warranted stringent sentences to serve as a deterrent, especially considering the premeditated and violent nature of the attack.

REFERENCE CASES

  • PP v Mok Chin Fan & Ors [2015] 6 MLJ 857
  • S Samdaran a/l Sivasamy v PP [2015] 3 MLJ 391
  • PP v Bachik Abdul Rahman [2004] 2 MLJ 534; [2004] 3 AMR 429; [2004] 2 CLJ 572
  • Gek Sing Kaliappan v PP [1999] 6 MLJ 641
  • PP v Jessica Lim Lu Ping & Anor [2004] AMR 239
  • Prabath Sinnathamby & Anor v PP [2013] 1 CLJ 873
Back to Latest Legal Updates

Recent Post

STRATA MANAGEMENT – MANAGEMENT FEE SHOWDOWN – RESIDENTIAL VS. COMMERCIAL – WHO’S PAYING FOR THE EXTRAS?

In a landmark decision in Aikbee Timbers Sdn Bhd & Anor v Yii Sing Chiu & Anor and another appeal [2024] 1 MLJ 94 , the Court of Appeal clarified the rules on maintenance charges and sinking fund contributions in mixed strata developments. Developers and management corporations can impose different rates based on the distinct purposes of residential and commercial parcels. The judgment emphasizes fairness, ensuring residential owners bear the costs of exclusive facilities like pools and gyms, while commercial owners aren’t subsidizing amenities they don’t use. This ruling highlights the importance of transparency in budgeting and equitable cost-sharing in mixed-use properties.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

ILLEGALITY OF UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS’ CLAIM – FINDER’S FEES AND ILLEGALITY: COURT DRAWS THE LINE ON UNREGISTERED ESTATE AGENTS

In a pivotal ruling, the Court of Appeal clarified that finder’s fee agreements are not automatically void under the Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers Act 1981. The Court emphasized that illegality must be specifically pleaded and supported by evidence, and isolated transactions do not trigger the Act’s prohibition. This decision highlights the importance of precise pleadings and a clear understanding of the law’s scope.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

COMPANIES ACT – OPPRESSION – DRAWING THE LINE: FEDERAL COURT DEFINES OPPRESSION VS. CORPORATE HARMS

In a decisive ruling, the Federal Court clarified the boundaries between personal shareholder oppression and corporate harm, overturning the Court of Appeal’s findings. The Court held that claims tied to the wrongful transfer of trademarks belonged to the company, not the individual shareholder, reaffirming that corporate harm must be addressed through a derivative action rather than an oppression claim.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

COMPANIES LAW – WHEN DIRECTORS BETRAY: COURT CONDEMNS BREACH OF TRUST AND CORPORATE MISCONDUCT

In a stark reminder of the consequences of corporate betrayal, the court found that the directors had systematically dismantled their own company to benefit a competing entity they controlled. By breaching their fiduciary duties, conspiring to harm the business, and unjustly enriching themselves, the defendants were held accountable through significant compensatory and exemplary damages, reaffirming the critical importance of trust and integrity in corporate governance.

Read More »
16 12 月 ,2024 尚無留言

JURISDICTION – CHOOSING THE RIGHT COURT: THE SEA JUSTICE CASE HIGHLIGHTS WHERE MARITIME DISPUTES SHOULD BE HEARD

In The Sea Justice cases [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 383 and [2024] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 429, the Singapore courts tackled a key question: which country should handle a maritime dispute when incidents span international waters? After examining the location of the collision, existing limitation funds in China, and witness availability, the courts concluded that China was the more appropriate forum. This ruling highlights that courts will often defer to the jurisdiction with the closest ties to the incident, ensuring efficient and fair handling of cross-border maritime disputes. This approach is also relevant in Malaysia, where similar principles apply.

Read More »
17 11 月 ,2024 尚無留言
zh_TWZH
en_USEN ms_MYMY zh_TWZH
× 联系我们