Pendakwa Raya v YUVANDRAN A/L VIJAYAINDRAN

Case Significance

Sets out the sentencing reasoning on a guilty plea to a reduced charge under section 304(a) of the Penal Code, balancing the public interest as a paramount consideration against the recognised one-quarter to one-third discount for a plea of guilty; seven years' imprisonment and a fine were imposed.

This High Court (Kuala Lumpur) decision sets out the grounds of sentence in a criminal matter in which the prosecution appealed against the sentence imposed. The accused had originally been charged with an offence under seksyen 302 Kanun Keseksaan (section 302 of the Penal Code — murder). After three prosecution witnesses had given evidence and two representations had been made through counsel to the Pendakwa Raya (the Public Prosecutor), the accused was offered an alternative charge under seksyen 304(a) Kanun Keseksaan (section 304(a) of the Penal Code — culpable homicide not amounting to murder), to which the accused pleaded guilty.

The alternative charge related to an incident on 8 October 2020 in the Cheras district of Kuala Lumpur, in which the accused was alleged to have caused the death of a person. On the guilty plea to the alternative charge, the court sentenced the accused to seven years' imprisonment from the date of arrest on 8 October 2020, and a fine of RM3,000 in default six months' imprisonment. The prosecution filed an appeal against that decision.

In its reasons on sentence the court weighed the public interest, noting that a life had been lost as a result of the accused's act, and citing Public Prosecutor v Loo Choon Fatt for the proposition that the public interest is a paramount sentencing consideration. It held that the public interest required a sentence sufficient to deter not only the accused but also others who might commit similar offences. The court also addressed the discount to be given for a plea of guilty, referring to Mohamed Abdullah Ang Swee Kang v Public Prosecutor, where the then Supreme Court observed that the reduction on account of a guilty plea would generally be between one-quarter and one-third. The judgment illustrates how a court calibrates a custodial term on a plea of guilty to a reduced homicide charge, balancing the public interest against the mitigation available.