Pendakwa Raya v PANG SIAT FUI

Case Significance

Illustrates the section 84 insanity defence: even where the prosecution proves a killing beyond reasonable doubt, an accused who establishes on the balance of probabilities under section 105 of the Evidence Act 1950 that a disease of the mind deprived him of the capacity to know his act was wrong is acquitted on that ground and detained in safe custody under section 347 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

This High Court decision concerns a murder charge under section 302 of the Kanun Keseksaan (Penal Code) and the successful invocation of the defence of unsoundness of mind under section 84. The prosecuting authority is the "Pendakwa Raya" (the Public Prosecutor); the accused is referred to here by role. The prosecution's case, supported by fifteen witnesses, was that the accused had stabbed and killed the deceased; shortly after the incident the accused walked into a police station and admitted the stabbing, and forensic and DNA evidence, together with eyewitness accounts of the accused discarding a knife, supported the prosecution's account.

A distinctive feature of the case was the psychiatric evidence. A forensic psychiatrist's report, prepared on the order of the Magistrate's Court under section 24(5) of the Kanun Prosedur Jenayah (Criminal Procedure Code, or KPJ), diagnosed the accused with schizophrenia — a mental illness marked by psychotic symptoms such as hallucinations and delusions — together with a polysubstance use disorder. The court accepted, after weighing the whole of the evidence, that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had caused the death within the meaning of section 302.

The decisive question, however, was the defence under section 84. The court held that the accused had discharged the burden that section 105 of the Akta Keterangan 1950 (Evidence Act 1950) places on a party asserting such a defence, proving on the balance of probabilities that, at the time of the act, by reason of a disturbance of mind he was incapable of knowing that what he was doing was wrong or contrary to law. The court therefore found the accused "dibebas atas alasan ketidakwarasan fikiran" (acquitted on the ground of unsoundness of mind), and, applying section 347 of the KPJ, ordered that he be kept in safe custody, with a report to be prepared under section 348(1).

The judgment is a clear illustration of the operation of the section 84 insanity defence: even where the prosecution proves the killing beyond reasonable doubt, an accused who establishes on the balance of probabilities, under section 105 of the Evidence Act 1950, that a disease of the mind deprived him of the capacity to know his act was wrong is to be acquitted on that ground and dealt with under section 347 of the Criminal Procedure Code.