MOHAMAD IRFAN SHAH BIN SASHI HAAN v Pendakwa Raya
Catchwords
Criminal Law — Appeal — Rape — Section 375(g) Penal Code — Requirement of penile penetration — Complainant unsure what penetrated — Whether prosecution proved penetration by male organ beyond reasonable doubt — Medical evidence showing only old hymenal tears —Uncertainty not clarified in reexamination — Whether trial judge misdirected himself — Whether conviction safe Criminal Procedure — Appeal — Appellate court’s duty — Whether conviction safe — Principles on disturbing findings of fact — Maximum evaluation of evidence — Burden on prosecution —Whether prima facie case established — Whether defence ought to have been called — Sections 316(b), 165, 169(2) & 173(m) Criminal Procedure Code Evidence — Sexual offences — Credibility of complainant — Contradictions in testimony —Instinctive knowledge of penile penetration — Application of Razi Anmin distinguished —Whether uncertainty can be elevated into proof — Corroboration — Medical evidence inconclusive — Prosecution evidence admitting of multiple inferences — Rule that inference favourable to accused must be adopted Criminal Law — Substitution of charge — Section 377CA Penal Code — Penetration by object not penis — Complainant unsure whether penetration was by penis or object — Whether facts proved reduce offence to minor offence — Whether substitution would prejudice accused — Whether essential element under s 377CA proved beyond reasonable doubt Criminal Law — Acquittal — Failure to establish actus reus of rape — Prosecution case unsafe— Conviction set aside — Acquittal and discharge ordered
Practice Areas
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.
Read on eJudgmentSource: eJudgment (ja-42jsks-14-07-2025)