AZHAR IQMAL BIN KHAIRUL HELMEE v Pendakwa Raya

ta-42jsks-1-01-2025 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 22 December 2025 • TA-42JSKS-1-01/2025

Catchwords

Criminal Law — Rape — Appeal against conviction and sentence — Whether conviction safe — Material discrepancy between charge and evidence — Date stated in charge (6 September 2022) vs evidence adduced (6 May 2022) — Whether variance of four months fatal — Failure to amend charge under Section 158 CPC — Prejudice to accused in mounting defence — Fair trial rights — Whether prosecution proved case beyond reasonable doubt — Complainant's credibility and consistency — Material inconsistencies in complainant's account — Medical history recorded location as Pulau Perhentian (not Pulau Redang) and assailant as "unknown person" — Contradictions between police statement, medical examination, and court testimony — Subsequent conduct of complainant — Voluntary sexual activity with another individual immediately after alleged rape — Complainant found with other adult males on separate occasions — Whether complainant's testimony "unusually convincing"— Whether medical evidence supported prosecution's case — Old hymenal tear at 1 o'clock position — No acute injuries consistent with recent forcible penetration — Tear could have occurred as early as 2020 — Absence of DNA or forensic evidence linking accused to complainant — Whether medical evidence neutral or favourable to defence Criminal Law — Evidence — Corroboration — Evidence of compromised witness — Witness separately charged for sexual offences involving same complainant — Witness admitted to sexual intercourse with complainant immediately after alleged offence — Whether such witness independent — Whether evidence approached with caution — Witness's observation of semen contradicted by negative forensic findings — Witness did not witness actual sexual intercourse — Whether evidence properly treated as corroborative — Failure to call material witnesses — Resort staff ("Aje," "Awe," "Jeme," "Piji") not called despite potential relevance — Whether absence created lacuna in prosecution case — Investigating officer acknowledged potential relevance of witnesses — Whether reasonable doubt arose from unexplained gaps — Extortion allegation — Appellant's evidence that complainant's mother demanded RM200,000 to withdraw complaint — Complainant's mother admitted meeting with appellant's mother but denied demand — Whether allegation capable of raising reasonable doubt — Whether trial judge erred in dismissing evidence as afterthought — Relevance to motive behind complaint and credibility of prosecution witnesses

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Parties (2)

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ta-42jsks-1-01-2025)