Mohd Asmil will continue to serve 20 years behind bars for causing the death of his wife after the High Court here affirmed the sentence meted out by the lower court.
KOTA KINABALU: The High Court here yesterday affirmed a man’s 20-year jail term, for causing the death of his wife by stepping on her stomach and damaging her liver.
In dismissing the man’s appeal, justice Datuk Nurchaya Hj Arshad ordered for Mohd Asmil Abbas, 38, to continue serving his sentence after finding no reason to disturb the punishment meted out by the lower court.
Nurchaya stressed that this is a domestic violence case, which therefore requires the court to take judicial notice of the rampancy of such cases in the country.
This, said Nurchaya, should be taken into serious consideration when imposing a punishment, more so with the rising statistic of domestic violence offences.
She added that there is no hard and fast rule as to what an appropriate sentence is or should be, as it must depend on the facts and circumstances of each particular case.
“Where the law does not fix a penalty for an offence, there will always be disparity in the sentences passed by the courts,” said Nurchaya, “for the simple reason that different facts and different circumstances call for different consideration.”
She also said that where the interest of the public and the interest of the offender collide, the interest of the public must take precedence.
Nurchaya further stressed that the appellant (Asmil), being a 34-year-old man at the time of the incident, had achieved the age of maturity and should thus be able to discern between right and wrong.
“The appellant should have self control over his actions and temperament,” she said.
“The deceased is his wife, whereby he should take care of her instead of punching, kicking and stepping on her stomach with no moral compunction and compassion and being so ruthless as to cause death.”
In stressing on the severity of the offence, Nurchaya cited the steps taken by the government and legislature to control the menace of wife abusers and beaters and the associated crimes, particularly where death ensues.
“This was made very clear by the amendment to Section 304(a) of the Penal Code, where the term of punishment was increased from 20 years to 30 years, which reflects on the gravity of the offence,” she said.
Earlier, the unrepresented appellant implored the court to lessen his punishment as he has three dependants who are now under the care of his siblings, and an ailing mother who had just undergone an operation for her kidney and eye, and who is not receiving care from anyone.
Meanwhile, the appeal faced strong objection from the prosecution, which was represented by deputy public prosecutor Wan Farrah Farriza Wan Ghazali.
The appellant was first convicted and sentenced on July 3 last year by the Sessions Court here, after he was found guilty of the offence, in addition to producing a fake MyKad when sending the deceased to the hospital for treatment.
On the first count, the appellant received 20 years’ imprisonment for committing culpable homicide not amounting to the murder of his 26-year-old spouse, at a house in Kampung Somboi in Kinarut, Papar on September 1, 2013.
The indictment came under Section 304(a) of the Penal Code, which is punishable with 30 years’ imprisonment and a fine, upon conviction.
On the second count, the appellant was also found guilty of having a photocopy of the fake MyKad under the name of Ismail Musa, bearing the numbers 780816-12-6183 at Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Damai, Luyang on September 10.
The offence was framed under Rule 25(1) (e) of the National Registration Regulations, which carries a maximum jail of three years and a fine of up to RM20,000, upon conviction.
However, he was ordered to serve his jail terms concurrently, which means that he will be put 20 years behind bars.
Apart from that, the trial judge also ordered the appellant to pay RM10,000 in compensation to the victim’s family and if he failed to do so, he would face another six months’ jail.
During trial, seven medical officers had testified that the deceased had died due to liver damage caused by the appellant, which led to a month-long coma.
The lower court also heard that the appellant had brought the deceased to the hospital and introduced himself as the deceased’s brother, by producing a copy of a fake identity card to avoid from being recognised by the hospital staff.
According to the prosecution, the appellant had hidden this matter from the deceased’s family and the deceased’s family members only came to know about the deceased’s condition after being informed by police a week later.
The prosecution also told the court, during trial, that the incident had occurred a few times but the deceased did not confide in her family.
A total of 19 prosecution witnesses were called to testify against the appellant during trial, while the defence had produced two witnesses, including the appellant.