Fadley Faisal
A Magistrate on March 21 sought for the High Court to revise a decision on finding that the charge in the case is defective.
The High Court quashed the conviction and remitted the case back for the necessary arrangements to be dealt by the Magistrate’s Court.
Chief Justice Dato Seri Paduka Steven Chong examined the case against Mohd Ariffin bin Abdul Rahman who was charged with theft in a dwelling.
Later, trial prosecutor Syazwani binti Jumat, who also represents the public prosecutor in the revision, withdrew the theft charge and pressed two charges of house trespassing and methylamphetamine consumption against the defendant.
The defendant pleaded guilty to the house trespassing charge and denied the drug consumption charge.
At this point, the Magistrate found that the charge of house trespassing pressed by the prosecutor, admitted by the defendant and led to his conviction, does not specify the offence the defendant intended to commit in entering the dwelling.
The Chief Justice also found the conviction to be unsustainable for two reasons.
The court found that “the charge is defective because of the omission” and “a charge of house trespass with intent to commit theft falls outside of the Magistrate’s Court jurisdiction”.
Prosecutor Syazwani also indicated to the Chief Justice that she will apply to withdraw the charge under Section 451 of the Penal Code and substituting it with a lesser charge of house trespass under Section 448 of the Penal Code, bringing the case within the Magistrate’s Court jurisdiction.
