PUTRAJAYA: The Appeals Court here yesterday upheld a High Court’s decision in imposing a 12-year jail term on housewife Yim Pek Ha who was found guilty of three counts of inflicting injuries on Indonesian maid Nirmala Bonat, eight years ago.
A three-man bench, headed by Justice Datuk Clement Allan Skinner, said they unanimously agreed that that there was no reason for the Apex Court to disturb the findings of the High Court.
However, Skinner said the court took into consideration the fact that the appellant (Yim) had already served two months under remand after her detention in 2008.
Therefore, Yim only needed to serve a total of 11 years and 10 months, he added.
Immediately after the decision, Yim, 44, broke down in tears and hugged her husband, family members and friends in the public gallery.
She was to serve her jail term at the Kajang Women’s Prison effective yesterday.
The two other judges were Datuk Linton Albert and High Court judge Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim.
Yim, 44, was charged with four counts of causing grievous hurt on Nirmala at her apartment in Villa Putera, Jalan Tun Ismail, Kuala Lumpur in January, March and April 2004.
She was found guilty and sentenced to 18 years’ jail by the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on three counts of causing grievous hurt to Nirmala with a hot iron and hot water, but was acquitted on the fourth charge of causing hurt to the maid with a metal cup.
Upon her appeal to the Kuala Lumpur High Court, her jail term was reduced to 12 years.
Reading the quorum’s finding, Skinner said both the Sessions Court and High Court had applied the correct principles in meting out the sentences, viewed by the panel as not excessive.
He said the court disagreed with the defence contention that the trial judge had failed to take into consideration the circumstantial evidence of medical experts that the injuries suffered by Nirmala could be self-inflicted.
He said the defence experts had relied on hypothetical situations and had not physically examined the victim.
On another matter, he said there was no merit in the appellant’s counsel’s argument that the charges against Yim were defective since no exact dates were stated.
Yim’s lawyer, Datuk Jagjit Singh, in his submission, had contended that since no dates were stated in the charges on when the injuries were inflicted on Nirmala, this had resulted in the defence having difficulty putting forward their alibi.
“The assault occurred in a domestic situation and the complainant cannot keep an exact diary on the incidents,” the judge pointed out.
On another issue raised by the appellant’s counsel, the panel said they agreed with deputy public prosecutor Mohd Abazafree Mohd Abas’ contention that it was not fatal for the prosecution’s case over its failure to call Nirmala’s cousin, Fermina Anunut.
“It does not affect the unfolding or narrative of the prosecution’s case,” Skinner said, referring to the appellant’s co-counsel, Akhbardin Abdul Kader’s argument that there was suppression of evidence on the part of the prosecution for not calling Fermina to testify and neither did it (the prosecution) offer her as a witness to the defence. — Bernama