Court rejects application by defence to impeach witness
Posted on January 27, 2012, Friday
SHAH ALAM: The High Court here yesterday dismissed an application by the defence in the murder trial of cosmetic millionairess Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya and three others to impeach a witness.
Judge Datuk Akhtar Tahir came to the decision after studying the testimony of the prosecution 32nd witness, Chief Inspector N Govindan, the interrogation officer from the Bukit Aman Criminal Investigation Department, and the police reports he lodged.
“I did not see any material contradiction between the witness testimony in the court and the police reports which he lodged. So, I’m not allowing the counsel’s application to continue with the impeachment proceeding,” he added.
On the defence’s application whether the documents used in the trial-within-trial (TWT) could be applied in the full trial, Akhtar said he had studied two case law by the High Court and the Federal Court.
He said he was bound by the case law of the Federal Court which ruled that the testimony from a TWT could not be applied in the main trial.
“However, the defence applied to tender a document (lock-up diary) in the main trial and at this stage, I’m allowing it to be marked as identification (ID),” he added.
On trial in the case are former lawyer N Pathmanabhan and three farm workers, T Thilaiyalagan, R Matan and R Khatavarayan.
They are charged with murdering Sosilawati, 47, bank officer Noorhisham Mohamad, 38, lawyer Ahmad Kamil Abdul Karim, 32, and Sosilawati’s driver, Kamaruddin Shamsuddin, 44.
Pathmanabhan, 43, Thilaiyalagan, 21, Matan, 22, and Kathavarayan, 32, are charged with committing the offence at Lot 2001, Jalan Tanjong Layang, Tanjung Sepat, Banting, between 8.30pm and 9.45pm on Aug 30, 2010.
The offence, under Section 302 of the Penal Code, carries the mandatory death sentence upon conviction.
Meanwhile, during a cross-examination by Matan’s lawyer, Amer Amzah Arshad, Govindan disagreed with the lawyer that he was selective and avoided giving certain information when he testified in court.
He said he came to know about the police reports lodged by Thilaiyalagan, Matan and Khatavarayan over the way they were treated by him during interrogation after being informed by the investigating officer in the case.
Govindan agreed with Amer Hamzah when the latter said that it was an offence to make a false police report.
Amer Hamzah: Despite them lodging report (against you) there are no police report lodged by you against any of the suspects for making false allegations against you?
Govindan: Agree
Amer Hamzah then showed him a picture of Thilaiyalagan, who was in hand-cuffs, being accompanied by two policemen during a search for exhibits at the Jambatan Kampung Sungai Endah, Banting, in September 2010.
When put by Amer Hamzah that there was no possibility of Thilaiyalagan over-powering the two policemen in that condition, Govindan said he disagreed.
The hearing, which entered its 59th day, continues today. — Bernama
<< Previous Entry - Next Entry >>
