Pendakwa Raya [Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] v Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa

Case Significance

Illustrates the ingredients of extortion by putting a victim in fear under section 385 of the Penal Code and the enhancement of sentence where the offender abuses a position of public trust as a police officer.

This High Court decision at Taiping concerns appeals against conviction and sentence for an extortion offence committed by a serving police officer, and the enhancement of the custodial sentence on appeal. The accused had been convicted after a full trial in the Sessions Court on a charge under seksyen 385 Kanun Keseksaan (section 385 of the Penal Code) of putting the complainant in fear of injury in order to commit extortion, the threatened harm being that intimate videos would be reported to the Pejabat Agama (the religious affairs office), by which he dishonestly induced the complainant to hand over a sum of RM300; he had originally faced an additional charge under section 376(2)(f) of the Penal Code of which he was acquitted after trial. On appeal the central questions were whether the Sessions Court judge had erred in law or in fact in convicting, whether the prosecution witnesses were credible, and whether the ingredients of the extortion charge had been proved, together with the appropriate sentence. The court held that there had been no judicial misappreciation of the evidence by the Sessions Court judge and that the ingredients of the offence had been established, so that the appeal against conviction failed. On sentence, however, the court considered the aggravating feature that the accused was a police officer, an appointed guardian entrusted with the security and safety of the public, who had abused the powers given to him by law and placed his personal interest above his duty, bringing disrepute to the service. Finding the original term inadequate to reflect the gravity of the abuse of office, the court enhanced the sentence of imprisonment from three years to five years, affirming the conviction and ordering accordingly. The judgment is a useful illustration of the ingredients of extortion by putting a victim in fear under section 385 of the Penal Code and of the enhancement of sentence where the offender abuses a position of public trust.