46
Current Law Journal
466 Supplementary Series [2001] 7 CLJ
a VEERIAN T LATCHMANEN
v.
PP
b HIGH COURT MALAYA, TAIPING
VT SINGHAM JC
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 42-04-01]
1 SEPTEMBER 2001
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Sentence - Principles of sentencing -
c Consideration of principles in Tukiran Taib v. PP - Whether must be reviewed
- Serious crimes involving young offenders - Whether should be spared
custodial sentence - Age of Majority Act 1971
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Revision - Plea of guilty - Whether a mitigating
d factor for lesser punishment - Whether appellant a first and youthful offender
- Whether age factor may be used as mitigating factor to escape custodial
sentence - Element of public interest
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Sentence - Powers of appellate court - When may
appellate court interfere with sentence imposed by lower court - Whether lower
e court exercised discretion in sentencing correctly - Whether reduction in
sentence justified
WORDS & PHRASES: “Juvenile offenders” - Young offenders - Youthful
offenders - Child offenders - Criminal Procedure Code - Juvenile Courts Act
1947 - Definition and classification - Whether terms may be used
f
interchangeably
The appellant had pleaded guilty to a charge of voluntarily causing hurt under
s. 324 of the Penal Code at the Sessions Court, Taiping. Upon being found
guilty, he was sentenced to 13 months’ imprisonment. The appellant was 20
g years old at the time of commission of the offence and 21 years old at the
time of sentencing. He subsequently filed an appeal asking this court to revise
the sentence. The appellant submitted that he had saved the court’s time by
pleading guilty and that he was a first and youthful offender. He also relied
on the ruling in Tukiran Taib in support of his submission.
h
Held:
[1] The principle in Tukiran Taib must be reviewed after taking into account
the nature of the offence committed by the appellant, the Age of
Majority Act 1971, and the increase in crime rate committed by young
i offenders between the ages of 18-21 years.
Current Law Journal
466 Supplementary Series [2001] 7 CLJ
a VEERIAN T LATCHMANEN
v.
PP
b HIGH COURT MALAYA, TAIPING
VT SINGHAM JC
[CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: 42-04-01]
1 SEPTEMBER 2001
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Sentence - Principles of sentencing -
c Consideration of principles in Tukiran Taib v. PP - Whether must be reviewed
- Serious crimes involving young offenders - Whether should be spared
custodial sentence - Age of Majority Act 1971
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Revision - Plea of guilty - Whether a mitigating
d factor for lesser punishment - Whether appellant a first and youthful offender
- Whether age factor may be used as mitigating factor to escape custodial
sentence - Element of public interest
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Sentence - Powers of appellate court - When may
appellate court interfere with sentence imposed by lower court - Whether lower
e court exercised discretion in sentencing correctly - Whether reduction in
sentence justified
WORDS & PHRASES: “Juvenile offenders” - Young offenders - Youthful
offenders - Child offenders - Criminal Procedure Code - Juvenile Courts Act
1947 - Definition and classification - Whether terms may be used
f
interchangeably
The appellant had pleaded guilty to a charge of voluntarily causing hurt under
s. 324 of the Penal Code at the Sessions Court, Taiping. Upon being found
guilty, he was sentenced to 13 months’ imprisonment. The appellant was 20
g years old at the time of commission of the offence and 21 years old at the
time of sentencing. He subsequently filed an appeal asking this court to revise
the sentence. The appellant submitted that he had saved the court’s time by
pleading guilty and that he was a first and youthful offender. He also relied
on the ruling in Tukiran Taib in support of his submission.
h
Held:
[1] The principle in Tukiran Taib must be reviewed after taking into account
the nature of the offence committed by the appellant, the Age of
Majority Act 1971, and the increase in crime rate committed by young
i offenders between the ages of 18-21 years.
