HO BENG HOCK v Pendakwa Raya [Pendakwa Raya]

q-05sh-61-02-2023 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 23 February 2025 • Q-05(SH)-61-02/2023 • 18 min read
5 cases cited (0 SG, 5 foreign)

Catchwords

Appeal against conviction and sentence – Section 26J of the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2009 (“ATIPSOM”) – smuggling of migrants – Conveyance of smuggled migrants – Whether the six (6) Indonesians are “smuggled migrants” – Section 2 of the ATIPSOM – Whether the Appellant was misled by the charge preferred against him – Whether the charge against the Appellant was defective by the fact that the word “involved” was stated in the charge instead of the word “engages” as per section 26J of ATIPSOM.

Practice Areas

Appeal against conviction and sentence

Judges (3)

Azimah binti Omar Coram Noorin binti Badaruddin Delivered Ravinthran a/l Paramaguru Coram

Counsel (5)

Thomas, Shankar Ram & Co. Adv. (Kuching) Firm Dato' Shankar Ram Asnani Counsel Appellant Liu Wan Ping Counsel Appellant Mohamad Arif Aizuddin Masrom Counsel Prosecution Shemira Binti Adzhar Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Pendakwa Raya Respondent Ho Beng Hock Appellant

Case Significance

HO BENG HOCK v Pendakwa Raya [Pendakwa Raya] is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated February 23, 2025 (citation: q-05sh-61-02-2023). <p>The appellant was convicted of conveying six Indonesian smuggled migrants under s.26J of ATIPSOM and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment with forfeiture of his vehicle. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal, finding the charge was not defective despite using the word 'involved' instead of 'engages' and affirming the prosecution had proven the offence beyond reasonable doubt.</p> The panel comprised Azimah binti Omar, Noorin binti Badaruddin and Ravinthran a/l Paramaguru, with Noorin binti Badaruddin delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Dato' Shankar Ram Asnani (counsel for appellant), Liu Wan Ping (counsel for appellant), Mohamad Arif Aizuddin Masrom (prosecution counsel), Shemira Binti Adzhar (counsel for appellant).

Summary

The appellant was convicted of conveying six Indonesian smuggled migrants under s.26J of ATIPSOM and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment with forfeiture of his vehicle. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal, finding the charge was not defective despite using the word 'involved' instead of 'engages' and affirming the prosecution had proven the offence beyond reasonable doubt.

What was the outcome of HO BENG HOCK v Pendakwa Raya [Pendakwa Raya]?

<p>The appellant was convicted of conveying six Indonesian smuggled migrants under s.26J of ATIPSOM and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment with forfeit...

Cases Cited (5)

MY (5)
[1946] MLJ 143 [1962] MLJ 107 [1981] 2 MLJ 230 [1985] 2 MLJ 436 [2008] 6 MLJ 19