Judge Datuk Rozana Ali Yusuff decided on the matter after submissions by BNM deputy public prosecutor Mardziatun Nisa Ahamadul Kabir and lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla for the defence.

In her judgement, Rozana said she had used her discretion under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code to allow the suspension pending the prosecution’s appeal against the directors’ acquittal. No date was set however.

On May 16, they were acquitted and discharged of 224 counts of money laundering and five counts of illegal deposit taking, involving more than RM100 million.

The three directors Ng Poh Weng, 63, had faced 93 counts; Marcus Yee Yuen Seng, 61, 40 counts and Chin Wai Leong, 37, 61 counts, whereas former director Liew Chee Wah, 59, 30 counts of money laundering.

They were charged under the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 with committing the offences at Public Bank Berhad, Kuala Lumpur branch, Menara Public Bank, 146, Jalan Ampang between July 2008 and June 2009.

They were also charged under the Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 with five counts of illegally receiving deposits from the public, allegedly committed at Jalan Kuchai Maju 6, off Jalan Kuchai Lama between November 2008 and July 2009.

Ng, Yee and Chin were represented by lawyer Mohamed Haniff while lawyer Keppy Wong appeared for Liew. — Bernama

Therefore, counsel Gurbachan Singh, who is representing Thilaiyalagan, said there was no purpose for his client to commit such a serious crime, just because he is a worker in the farm owned by first accused, N Pathmanabhan, knowing full well the dire penalty for the offence of murder upon conviction.

“There is no sufficient or adequate evidence that the four persons are actually dead, leave alone being murdered, at the farm on Aug 30 between 8.30pm and 9.45pm.

“It is a most vital ingredient for the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt. Even the presumption of death cannot be invoked under the Evidence Act 1950 before seven years are up,” he said in his submission.

Pathmanabhan and three farm workers Thilaiyalagan, R Matan and R Khatavarayan are charged with the murder of Sosilawati, 47, bank officer Noorhisham Mohamad, 38, lawyer Ahmad Kamil Abdul Karim, 32, and Sosilawati’s driver, Kamaruddin Shamsuddin, 44, at Lot 2001, Jalan Tanjong Layang, Tanjung Sepat, between 8.30pm and 9.45pm on Aug 30, 2010, and face the mandatory death sentence, if convicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code.

Gurbachan further submitted that the court finding at the prima facie stage, that the four persons were beaten to death on the farm, was not borne by evidence.

He said, not only must the death of the four persons be proved as a fact, beyond any reasonable doubt, but also that they were murdered on the farm on Aug 30, between 8.30pm and 9.45pm, by the common intention of all the four accused.

“It is submitted that there is not an iota of evidence of common intention adduced by the prosecution, nor evidence from which this court can confidently make a finding of common intention,” he said.

On the two notes of proceedings involving the case of two prosecution witnesses, U. Suresh and K. Sarawanan, who were charged for disposing evidence related to the murder case, Gurbachan said both exhibits had no probative value but only had prejudicial effect, especially in view of the fact that both Suresh and Sarawanan were not even referred to, or confronted with both exhibits when cross-examined by the prosecution as hostile witnesses.

Suresh, 29, and Sarawanan, 22, are now serving 20 years’ imprisonment in Sungai Udang Prison, Melaka.

“Even if it is taken for the sake of argument that both notes of proceedings are technically admissable, your Lordship can, in the interest of justice, disregard the contents of both exhibits in the higher interest of justice,” he said.

On the evidence by the fourth accused, Kathavarayan, Gurbachan said, although the defence team did not rely on his version, the court should accept his evidence as it would show that there was no crime of murder committed on Aug 30, as alleged in the charge, and that Sosilawati was alive on Sept 7, 2010 as seen by the fourth accused at a restaurant.

He further submitted that the prosecution’s case was that the RM3 million cheque issued to Sosilawati was in respect of the sale of land transaction in 2010.

In fact, he said, the submission of the prosecution and the subsequent finding by court was completely misconceived and unsustainable as the land was already sold by Sosilawati, way back in 2008 to a company, Ample Quality Sdn Bhd.

“As such, the cheque had absolutely no link or nexus with the sale of land as there was no sale of the Penang land in 2010, it having been sold in 2008. There has been a complete misappreciation of evidence, causing an erroneous finding of fact, and this has occasioned a serious miscarriage of justice in that the very basis and foundation of the court’s decision in calling for the defence is non-existent,” he said.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Saiful Edris Zainuddin, in his submission earlier, said it had been established that Sosilawati had gone to Banting to discuss a land matter with Pathmanabhan and expedite a RM3 million cheque to pay staff bonus and for her personal use for Hari Raya which was around the corner.

He said, as on Aug 30, 2010 (the day Sosilawati and friends had gone missing) Pathmanabhan only had RM1.38 million in his account which was insufficient to clear the cheque, and the motive of insufficient funds to honour the cheque was a very compelling reason to kill Sosilawati and her friends.

Justice Datuk Akhtar Tahir is set to deliver his decision tomorrow. — Bernama

Judicial Commissioner Samsudin Hassan held that the prosecution had failed to prove a prima facie case against S Velo, 34, S Murugan, 36, and S Thanasilan, 25 under Section 302 of the Penal Code which carries the mandatory death sentence, upon conviction.

Velo, a former security guard and brothers Murugan and Thanasilan, who worked in a garage, were jointly charged with murdering policeman C Selva Ganesan in an oil palm plantation near the Chinese Cemetery in Taman Skudai Baru, Skudai, between 3.40am Sept 17 and 9.50am Sept 20, 2009.

In his judgement, Samsudin said none of the prosecution witnesses could link the trio to the crime.

“So the court finds that the prosecution has failed to prove a prima facie case against the three accused and therefore orders them to be discharged and acquitted,” he said.

Deputy Public Prosecutor Rahimah Abd Majid appeared for the prosecution while the three men were represented by lawyer Tun Mohamad Amar Aziz. — Bernama

According to the department’s Deputy Superintendent Kalbin Mohd Said, they were from the Philippines and Indonesia.

The 10 boys, two Indonesians and eight Filipinos, are now in Henry Gurney school for boys together with 204 locals in Keningau, while the girl, a Filipina is residing in the Henry Gurney school for girls in the state capital.

Kalbin, who was recalled to give his statement to the Royal Commission of Inquiry on the presence of illegal immigrants in Sabah yesterday, said the state Prison’s Department also allows the juveniles to complete their education while serving their sentences.

They are also allowed to sit for the Malaysian government examinations, he said, adding that the government pays for the locals’ examination fees.

“If they score good results, we, the Prison Department Visitor Judge Board, will recommend the individual for early release so that he or she can go for further studies. Early release will also depend on the individual’s behavior while in school,” he said.

Kalbin also told the panel that the management cost for each inmate at the schools is RM33 a day, the same as that of the adult prisoners in the state prisons.

He said that since 2007, the state Prisons Department has spent RM614,355 on the foreign juveniles sent to Henry Gurney.

According to the former Labuan Corporation Investment and Socio Economy Department director Manisah Mahmud, the population census was carried out in September 2010.

Most of the foreigners were trading officers, expatriates and employees with work passes, she said.

She also told the panel that there were two squatter colonies in Labuan, one in Patau Patau and the other in Kiansam.

The major problem caused by the squatter colonies is cleanliness as it is up to Labuan Corporation to do the clearing up, she said.

In his statement of defence, which was filed at the High Court here yesterday, Wan Muhammad Azri, 30, said the house address stated in Anwar’s suit was also not his and that he did not know the plaintiff in a personal capacity.

He further denied having posted defamatory remarks or images against Anwar and said he had no malicious intention to tarnish Anwar’s reputation as alleged by him. Anwar’s lawyer Mohd Afiq Mohd Noor told reporters that in yesterday’s proceedings, Judicial Commissioner Lee Heng Cheong set June 5 for case management.

On March 21, Anwar filed a RM100-million defamatory suit against Wan Muhammad Azri for allegedly posting a series of defamatory remarks on the www.papagomo.com blog on March 16, 17, 19 and 20. — Bernama

clip from a CCTV camera showed the wife of the slain businessman had climbed out of her bedroom window.

He said the clip did not show anyone else entering or walking towards the upstairs window.

Yeoh was testifying at the trial of the 17-year-old boy charged with murder and attempted murder. Timber and shipping businessman Ling Tong Hock, 36, his mother Leong Nyuk Lan, 76, and his two children David Ling Chei Qi, 10, and Amy Ling Zi Jiun, 7, were found murdered between 6am and 7.30am on Jan 3 last year at their double-storey terraced house in RTM Road.

Ling’s eight-year-old son Kelvin Ling was also attacked but not killed.

Ling’s wife Li Xian Lan, 28, a Chinese national, escaped the attack through her bedroom window. Replying to the defence counsel Darren Ling, Yeoh said he had watched part of the CCTV recordings with Inspector Heng.

Yeoh said he received a call that fateful morning, informing him a house had been broken into.

“I did attempt to clarify the identity of the person who called me. He told me he stayed nearby but did not mention his name.

“As soon as I received his call, I together with Corporal Jerry went to the house concerned where there was a crowd of people gathering,” he recalled.

He said at that particular moment he did not notice anyone in the crowd carrying a hammer trying to break the front gate of the house.

DC: At that particular moment, do you agree with me that you did not pay attention to the crowd of people outside the gate of that house?

Yeoh: I agree.

DC: In other words, could you agree with me you were with that crowd of people when you first arrived?

Yeoh: Yes.

DC: When you managed to get into the compound of that house, you saw through the sliding glass door a body lying motionless in the kitchen?

Yeoh: Yes, but could not see the body clearly.

DC: You were with other relatives of the victims in the house?

Yeoh: Yes.

DC: Since the front gate was locked, did you know how they had got into the compound of the house?

Yeoh: Same way as I did.

DC: Since you and Corporal Jerry could not enter that house because the grill was locked, therefore both of you entered the house through a window upstairs.

Yeoh: Yes.

DC: And when you managed to gain access to the house through the window upstairs, you checked room to room upstairs?

Yeoh: Yes.

DC: At that material time, did you check the third bedroom upstairs?

Yeoh: It was locked at that time.

DC: Since it was locked at that time and in order to make sure that all the bedrooms were secure; did you try to make any forced entry into the third bedroom?

Yeoh: I did not.

DC: Since the third bedroom was locked and you did not attempt to break in, you assume that all the bedrooms upstairs were secure?

Yeoh: Not really.

DC: Since you did not gain any access to the third bedroom, you did not know whether there was anyone inside that bedroom.

Yeoh: Yes.

To another question, Yeoh said while inside the house, he took keys from the living hall to unlock the front gate.

He said he did not notice any damage on the front gate when he opened it with the key.

He said after opening the front gate, he let the paramedics enter the house.

Yeoh said he was not with the paramedics all the time while they attended to the victims and that Corporal Jerry was helping to prevent other people from entering the house.

Hearing continues on May 30.

The Magistrate’s court here fixed May 29 for the pre-trial case management and hearing on July 24 and 25 for the case involving Kamaruszaman Mohamad Hussin, 34, and Kang Hee Choo, 36.

They had allegedly committed the offence on Dec 23, 2011, at about 5pm at a government hospital here with the intention of unlawfully transferring possession, custody and control of the Chinese baby.

They are charged under Section 48 of the Child Act 2001 and can be charged under Section 34 of the Penal Code.

The penalty upon conviction is a fine not exceeding RM10,000 or imprisonment of not more than five years, or both.

In a separate case, a teenage boy from Kampung Tabuan Hilir was released on RM5,000 court bail with one surety after he pleaded not guilty to two charges of stealing a motorcycle.

The Magistrate’s court fixed pre-trial case management on June 18 and trial dates on July 29 and 30 for this case involving Noornashrah Razemi, 19.

In the first charge, at about noon on May 13 at Jalan Merdeka in Petra Jaya, he was alleged to have stolen a Honda EX-5 motorcycle worth about RM2,000.

He is being charged under Section 379A of the Penal Code, in which the penalty upon conviction is a jail term of not less than a year but not more than seven years, and a fine.

For the second charge, he was alleged to have, at the same time and place, been unable to produce his identity card when asked to do so by the police for investigation purposes.

As such, he is deemed to have committed an offence under Rule 7 of the National Registration Act 1959 (Act 78) and Regulations. He can also be charged under Rule 25(1)(a) of the same Act.

For this charge, he may faced a jail term of not more than three years or fined, or both.

As the organiser of the rally, Nik Nazmi, 31, who is also Seri Setia assemblyman, was charged with failing to notify Petaling Jaya police about the venue of the rally 10 days before the event took place. He was alleged to have committed the offence at Petaling Jaya Municipal Council (MBPJ) Stadium in Kelana Jaya here at 8.30pm on May 8.

The charge under Section 9(1) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 carries a fine of not more than RM10,000 upon conviction.

Judge Rozina Ayob fixed June 4 for mention of the case.

Deputy Solicitor-General II Datuk Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah appeared for the prosecution, while Nik Nazmi was represented by lawyer Eric Paulsen.

Earlier, Eric also told the court that the defence would file an application at the High Court to strike out the charge on the ground that it was an abuse of court’s process and contravened public policy.

Also present at the court was PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar.— Bernama

Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) had frozen the assets totalling more than RM100 million under the Banking and Financial Institution Act following their indictment for 224 charges of illegal money laundering and five charges of receiving deposits without a licence.

Judge Datuk Rozana Ali Yusuff set the date following an application by Bank Negara Deputy Public Prosecutor Mardziatun Nisa Ahamadul Kabir to suspend the release of the assets pending disposal of the prosecution’s appeal filed this morning (yesterday) against the acquittal.

Mardziatun said should the High Court allow the appeal, there would then be no guarantee that the investors would get their money back.

“The appeal will become academic if the suspension is rejected,” she said, submitting further that the application was to protect the interest of the investors involved.

However, Counsel Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla who represented the three directors, Ng Poh Weng, 63, Marcus Yee Yuen Seng, 61, and Chin Wai Leong, 37, submitted that there were two sets of accounts in the case.

One was the directors’ accounts, of which there was no evidence that they contained investors’ money, and the company’s account which justifiably showed the amount to be business-derived earnings.

Ng was charged with 93 counts, Yee, 40 counts, Chin, 61 counts, and former Genneva Sdn Bhd director Liew Chee Wah, 30 counts of illegal money laundering.

They are alleged to have committed the offences at Public Bank Berhad, Kuala Lumpur branch, Menara Public Bank, 146, Jalan Ampang between July 2008 and June 2009.

They were also charged with five counts of illegally receiving deposits from the public, allegedly committed in Jalan Kuchai Maju 6, off Jalan Kuchai Lama between November 2008 and July 2009.

Liew, 59, was represented by Counsel Keppy Wong. — Bernama

Judge Caroline Bee Majanil imposed the sentence yesterday on Jinyul Muranu after finding him guilty of robbing a local man of a cellphone at Suria Sabah shopping centre here on May 24, 2012.

Jinyul, who committed the offence with a friend, who is still at large, was charged under Section 395 of the Penal Code which is punishable by a jail term of up to 20 years and also liable to whipping, upon conviction.

Deputy public prosecutor Afzan Abd Kahar called six witnesses while the defence called one witness.

In a separate case, a man will stand trial on July 1–2 this year for allegedly injuring a woman with an ice cube.

Zaheer Younus, who appeared before magistrate Nuruhuda Mohd Yusof, was charged under Section 323 of the Penal Code which carries a maximum jail of two years and also liable to a fine, upon conviction.

He was caught throwing an ice cube at the woman, causing hurt to her, at a house in Sepanggar, Menggatal at 2am on Jan 25.

He was released on RM2,000 bail deposited in two local sureties, pending disposal of the case.

Prosecuting officer Inspector Syahrin Ali prosecuted.

Bandahala

KOTA KINABALU: The Court of Appeal here yesterday upheld the death sentence of a taxi driver who was convicted of killing his niece eight years ago.

Justice Datuk Ramly Hj Ali, who sat together with Justices Dato’ Wira Mohtarudin Baki and Datuk Dr Hj Hamid Sultan Abu Backer unanimously dismissed an appeal by Bandahala Unduk, 55, against his sentence and conviction.

On April 13, 2009, the Tawau High Court found the respondent guilty of murdering his 20-year-old niece at Kampung Takada in Bum-Bum Island, Semporna on March 27, 2006.

He was convicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code which carries the mandatory death sentence, upon conviction.

In affirming the respondent’s conviction and sentence, the court held that without the pathologist’s testimony and a post-mortem report of the deceased, there was still overwhelming evidence in the case.

Earlier, counsel Rakhbir Singh submitted that it was pertinent to call the pathologist who was not called during the trial and the deceased’s post-mortem was not tendered.

Rakhbir contended why the doctor was not called to testify while the family also refused to have a post-mortem on the deceased who died due to multiple slash wounds with hemorrhagic shock.

In reply, deputy public prosecutor Farah Ezlin Yusop Khan rebutted that the prosecution had other overwhelming evidence strongly pointing to the respondent.

She submitted that one of the prosecution witnesses was told that the uncle had slashed the deceased, adding that a medical report was tendered during the trial.

According to the respondent, who spoke to his counsel, that he would appeal to the Federal Court against the decision.

RELEASED: Lim (outside police car) speaks to the suspects after they were released from remand.

KUCHING: Three local suspects nabbed in the bust on the ‘Macau Scam’ were released after their remand period expired yesterday.

Two of them were represented by defence counsel Lim Lian Kee while the third by defence counsel Roger Chin.

The rest of the suspects will have their remand expire today.

The local suspects were allegedly involved in the scam along with 84 foreign nationals.

According to Lim, the two local suspects he represented claimed they were just delivering food to the premises on the day of the bust.

A third local suspect claimed he was a house broker taking a look at the premises during that time.

The syndicate, believed to have raked in some RM4 billion from victims in China and Taiwan, was busted last Thursday when police personnel from Malaysia, China and Taiwan swooped on two houses in the city following police reports lodged by victims in the two countries.

Members of the syndicate would contact their victims via the Internet, claiming to be police personnel from China or Taiwan, and ‘inform’ them that their bank accounts were being investigated by the Central Bank of their respective countries.

After scaring the victims with the prospect of their accounts being frozen, the suspects would convince them to transfer their funds into a temporary account, but they (suspects) would become unreachable after that.

Testifying at the trial of a 17-year-old lad, Yeoh, 33, he said he received a call around 8.15am that day, informing him a house at RTM Road had been broken into and some people were injured.

Yeoh called the Operations Room and instructed that the hospital be informed.

Together with his photographer Corporal Jerry, they arrived at the crime scene at about 8.40am.

He recalled that there was a crowd and a police vehicle outside the locked gate of the house.

Yeoh said he climbed over a partition wall from a neighbouring house to enter the compound of the house where the murder took place.

“I broke the lock of the sliding glass door, but could not enter the house as the grill was locked,” he said.

He and his men later entered the house through a window of an upstairs room.

Yeoh told the court he was armed with a pistol when he checked the rooms in the house to make sure it was safe for the paramedics to enter.

There was no suspect in the house but he came across five bodies — two children in a room upstairs, a boy in a room downstairs, a man and an old lady in the kitchen — all covered in blood.

He managed to open the locked grill door and the front gate using the keys found in the living room, and instructed the paramedics to enter the house.

He said the paramedics brought out a boy from a room upstairs who was still alive while the four bodies were taken to Sibu Hospital.

Yeoh said he later instructed the deceased’s wife to enter the house together with Inspector Heng Kok How to view the CCTV recordings.

Brutally slain in their double-storey terraced house at RTM Road between 6am and 7.30am on Jan 3 last year were timber and shipping businessman Ling Tong Hock, 36, his mother Leong Nyuk Lan, 76, and his two children David Ling Chei Qi, 10, and Amy Ling Zi Jiun, 7.

The boy brought out alive was Ling’s eight-year-old son Kelvin Ling who survived the attack.

Ling’s wife Li Xiao Lan, 28, a Chinese national escaped though a bedroom window.

The accused faces charges of murder and attempted murder.

The hearing continues today.

Magistrate Ahmad Dzulfadzli Hamdan also ordered Zaidi Latif, 32, to be placed under two years’ supervision.

He committed the offence at Taman Sukma at about 11.15am on Dec 7, 2009 and was charged under Section 15(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drug Act 1952 punishable under Section 15 of the same act.

In an unrelated case, a teenager pleaded not guilty to stealing money from a shop in Kota Sentosa Commercial Centre.

The magistrate has fixed pre-trial case management on June 12 and trial on July 1 and 2.

The teenager allegedly stole RM288 from a shop at about 12.30 midnight on May 9.

He was charged under Section 381 of the Penal Code which carries a sentence of up to seven years in jail and can also be fined.

In another separate case, a teenager was sent to Henry Gutney School for three years after he was convicted of a robbery case.

The boy, 18, from Kampung Quap Dayak, was charged under the Child Act 91 (f).

The Magistrates’ Court also ordered that his parents to be in contact with him at all time to monitor his progress under Child Act 93 (e).

He committed the offence outside a school premises at Kuching-Serian Road at about 2pm on April 19.

He had robbed a 16-year-old boy of his Samsung Galaxy S2.

Sessions Court judge M.Rajalingam, who sat as a magistrate, granted the warrant against Inspector Mohd Hazuwan Bin Hamzah, 30, upon application by deputy public prosecutor Shukor Abu Bakar.

Rajalingam issued an order to arrest Mohd Hazuwan when he failed to appear on May 14 to 17 for the trial of a case under Section 201 of the Penal Code.

Hazuwan was ordered to attend the trial for losing evidence in a case on September 24, 2009.

The charge under Section 201 of the Penal code provides imprisonment of ten years, or fine, or both, on conviction.

Judge Duncan Sikodol passed the sentence after the accused admitted to raping the underage girl in a van at an oil palm plantation in Papar in July 2012.

He was convicted under Section 376 (2) (e) of the Penal Code which provides for a maximum jail term of 30 years and whipping upon conviction.

Deputy public prosecutor Chow Siang Kong told the court that the victim’s mother was informed by one of her daughters about a baby boy at their home.

The mother then went home and found the victim squatting in the bathroom and a baby boy placed on a plate rack.

After being questioned repeatedly, the victim finally admitted to giving birth to the baby as a result of her relationship with the accused.

The victim told her mother that she gave birth to the baby at about 1am on April 13 this year.

Her mother then took the victim and the baby to a clinic in Papar but a doctor advised the mother to bring them to a hospital because the victim was suffering from childbirth injuries while the baby had lung complication.

Further examination at the hospital found that the victim was raped around July 2012 based on her pregnancy duration.

Police investigation revealed that the victim and the accused became close since early 2012 when the accused was sending the victim and her sister to school as well as fetching them from school.

The accused, who was not represented by a lawyer, pleaded for leniency, saying he has to provide for three children and his parents, and he regretted what he had done.

The prosecution submitted that the accused had committed a serious offence as he raped an underage child until she gave birth to his baby.

Marcel Jude A/L M S Joseph, who stood as an independent in N15 Api-Api state constituency, filed the judicial review application seeking to compel the Chairman of Election Commission (EC), the EC and Chief Registrar of Voters (Ketua Pendaftar Pemilih Malaysia) to have the electoral rolls in respect of N15 Api-Api to be cleaned up by the removal of any dubious voters.

High Court Judge Ravinthran N. Paramaguru set the hearing date for the application by Marcel who named, in his ex-parte application for leave for judicial review, the Chairman of EC, the EC and Chief Registrar of Voters as the first, second and third respondents respectively.

The applicant said he was shocked on May 1, 2013, to read in the local newspapers that according to the EC Chairman, there were 60,673 dubious entries in the electoral rolls of Sabah.

These entries include incomplete addresses, similar names appearing more than once, wrong gender and so on.

Marcel said he is seeking an order of mandamus to require the respondents to undertake a thorough and extensive examination of the electoral rolls of Sabah particularly the electoral rolls of N15 Api-Api where the applicant is standing as a candidate; N16 Luyang and P172 Kota Kinabalu where the applicant is exercising his constitutional rights to vote; to identify the 60,673 dubious entries in the electoral rolls and thereafter to publish all the names, addresses, gender and other particulars of the said dubious entries for examination by the members of the public in Sabah and Malaysia for a reasonable period of time for the purpose of clarification and drawing objection.

He is further seeking an order of mandamus to require the respondents to remove the 60,673 dubious entries or any part thereof in so far as they are found in the electoral rolls of the state constituencies of Api-Api and Luyang, and the parliamentary constituency of Kota Kinabalu.

Marcel said he also prays for an order of certiorari to quash the Writ of Election and the Notice of Election issued by the respondents in respect of the state constituencies of Api-Api, Luyang and the parliamentary constituency of Kota Kinabalu by reason of 60,673 dubious entries or any part thereof insofar as they are found in the electoral rolls of the state constituencies of Api-Api, Luyang and the Parliamentary constituency of Kota Kinabalu.

The applicant is also seeking refund of the sum of RM8,000 paid by him to the respondents to participate in the state election of N15 Api Api, and damages for negligence of the respondents in issuing the Writ of Election and the Notice of Election without the removal of 60,673 dubious entries, or the disclosure by the respondents of 60,673 dubious entries to him prior to his registration as a candidate in the constituency of Api Api.

Marcel is also praying for damages for misrepresentation and failure of the respondents to issue the Writ of Election and the Notice of Election for the state constituencies of Api-Api, Luyang and the parliamentary constituency of Kota Kinabalu without the removal of 60,673 dubious entries or the disclosure by the Respondent of 60,673 dubious entries prior to the applicant’s registration as a candidate in the constituency of Api Api.

He is also claiming damages for fraud, costs and any other relief deemed fit by the court.

Judge Duncan Sikodol passed the sentence after the accused admitted to raping the underage girl in a van at an oil palm plantation in Papar in July 2012.

He was convicted under Section 376 (2) (e) of the Penal Code which provides for a maximum jail term of 30 years and whipping upon conviction.

Deputy public prosecutor Chow Siang Kong told the court that the victim’s mother was informed by one of her daughters about a baby boy at their home.

The mother then went home and found the victim squatting in the bathroom and a baby boy placed on a plate rack.

After being questioned repeatedly, the victim finally admitted to giving birth to the baby as a result of her relationship with the accused.

The victim told her mother that she gave birth to the baby at about 1am on April 13 this year.

Her mother then took the victim and the baby to a clinic in Papar but a doctor advised the mother to bring them to a hospital because the victim was suffering from childbirth injuries while the baby had lung complication.

Further examination at the hospital found that the victim was raped around July 2012 based on her pregnancy duration.

Police investigation revealed that the victim and the accused became close since early 2012 when the accused was sending the victim and her sister to school as well as fetching them from school.

The accused, who was not represented by a lawyer, pleaded for leniency, saying he has to provide for three children and his parents, and he regretted what he had done.

The prosecution submitted that the accused had committed a serious offence as he had raped an underage child and caused her to give birth to his baby.

Deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Saiful Edris Zainuddin submitted that the fourth accused’s evidence was in conflict with the testimonies of the other three.

Especially on the issue of whether Sosilawati and her friends were present at Ladang Gadong on Aug 30, 2010 and their involvement in murdering at least three victims, namely bank officer Noorhisham Mohamad, lawyer Ahmad Kamil Abdul Karim and Sosilawati’s driver, Kamaruddin Shamsuddin, he added.

“As a result of that, the question that arises is, which of the defence version is true or capable of raising reasonable doubt on the prosecution’s case.

“Because all the evidence of the accused are unreliable, including the fourth accused’s, any evidence from them which is inconsistent with the prosecution’s case is unsafe, unreliable and should be rejected,” he said.

N Pathmanabhan and three farm workers T Thilaiyalagan, R Matan and R Khatavarayan are charged with the murder of Sosilawati, 47, Noorhisham, 38, Ahmad Kamil, 32 and Kamaruddin, 44, at Lot 2001, Jalan Tanjong Layang, Tanjung Sepat, between 8.30pm and 9.45pm on August 30, 2010, and face the mandatory death sentence, if convicted under Section 302 of the Penal Code.

Saiful Edris further submitted that with the ‘disastrous effect’ displayed by the fourth accused and the rest of the accused persons, none of their evidence which is exculpatory in nature was reliable.

Hence, he said, the prosecution’s contention on the issue of discovery under Section 27 of the Evidence Act 1950 was still intact and should be accepted without a doubt.

Saiful Edris also urged the court to revisit the evidence of similar occurrences as put forward by two prosecution witnesses, namely Samson Nahar Mohamed Dali and Usharani Sethuraman, who confirmed that their husbands met Pathmanabhan on business matters and have been missing since.

He stated that, Pathmanabhan’s former maid, Siti Hamidah Karnax, had also testified that she had seen these men at the farm and witnessed a bonfire similar to the one in Sosilawati’s case.

He further submitted that there was a close resemblance in facts where the two men met with Pathmanabhan at Ladang Gadong just like the four individuals in Sosilawati’s case and all of them are still missing to date.

Saiful Edris also said that it had been established earlier that Sosilawati had gone to Banting to discuss a land matter with Pathmanabhan and expedite a RM3 million cheque to pay staff bonus and for her personal use for Hari Raya which was around the corner.

He said, according to bank officer, Yvonne Tiong Guat Choo, (98th prosecution witness) as at Aug 30, 2010 (the day Sosilawati and friends had gone missing) Pathmanabhan only had RM1.38 million in his account which was insufficient to clear the cheque.

“Pathmanabhan and his counsel (Manjit Singh Dhillon) were trying to argue that the insufficient funds in Pathmanabhan’s account was due to the account being frozen by the police but they failed to adduce any evidence to that effect. Furthermore, Pathmanabhan was only arrested on Sept 11, 2010, two days after the date on the cheque.

“To sum up, the motive of insufficient funds to honour the cheque was a very compelling reason to kill Sosilawati and her friends. And this motive remains unrebutted,” he said.

The hearing before judge Datuk Akhtar Tahir resumes on May 21. — Bernama