- 太太在马来亚大学医学中心（UMMC）生下了她的女儿。当太太在UMMC的儿童病房时，丈夫来到病房探望女儿。 太太和丈夫发生了口角。
- The accused (A) and the victim (V) are husband and wife.
- V gave birth to her daughter at at University of Malaya Medical Center (UMMC). While V was in the Children’s Ward of UMMC, A came to the ward. A and V had a quarrel.
- During the quarrel, A stated that he wanted to divorce V and to get custody of their child. V objected on the basis that A is a drug addict and an abuser. A lost his temper and punched her twice on the face and once on the cheek. Then A continued to punch V on her nose and her mouth when she stated that she wanted to lodge a police report.
- The attack eventually caused V to sustain an un-displaced nasal bone fracture.
- W lodged her police report against A. A was subsequently arrested and charged in court.
- A was charged under section 325 read with section 326A of the Penal for voluntarily causing grievous hurt to his own wife (V).
- A argued that there was no adult eye witnesses to what occurred during the material time, except children who were undergoing treatment in the ward, as the curtain was drawn closed when the incident happened。
- A testified that he did not punch V, but he had slapped V’s face multiple times.
- There is no mandatory requirement for the victim’s evidence to be corroborated, and as long as this court accepts the truth of the victim’s evidence, it is enough.
- This court is of the view that evidence must be weighed and not counted. As long as the evidence given by the witness has a ring of truth, is cogent, credible and trustworthy, then it is sufficient.
- After hearing the evidence, this court accepts the truth of V’s evidence for two reasons. First, V had lodged a police report, and the evidence given by V was consistent with the police report lodged. Second, the prosecution had tendered the photos of V taken before she was treated by the medical personnel to support V’s evidence. Looking at the photos, this court finds that the injuries suffered by the victim on the face, cheek, nose and mouth in the photos were consistent with the evidence given by V in court. Thus, this court finds that V is a truthful witness and the prosecution had established that A caused hurt to V.
- The Court sentence A to 3 years’ imprisonment commencing from the date of sentence.
- To establish the charge under Section 325/326Aof the Penal Code, the prosecution has to prove beyond reasonable doubt these ingredients:
(a) The accused caused hurt to his spouse or former spouse, a child, an incapacitated adult or other member of the family;
(b) The hurt caused was ‘grievous’ as specified in Section 320;
(c) The accused intended to cause or knew that he was likely to cause grievous hurt; and
(d) The accused caused the hurt voluntarily.
- The prosecution has to prove that the hurt caused was ‘grievous’ as defined Section 320 of the Penal Code. The following kinds of hurt are deemed ‘grievous’ under Section 320 of the Penal Code:
(b)permanent privation of the sight of either eye;
(c)permanent privation of the hearing of either ear;
(d)privation of any member or joint;
(e)destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint;
(f)permanent disfiguration of the head or face;
(g)fracture or dislocation of a bone;
(h)any hurt which endangers life, or which causes the sufferer to be, during the space of ten days, in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.
- The prosecution called Dr. Athirah binti Abdul Wahid (PW3), the medical doctor from UMMC who had examined the victim at the hospital to prove that the hurt caused to the victim was ‘grievous’. PW3’s evidence shows that there was a fracture of the nasal bone.
- Therefore, this court finds that the injuries suffered by the victim fall under Section 320(g) of the Penal Code. Thus, the prosecution had successfully proved the crucial element of ‘grievous hurt’ under Section 325 of the Penal Code.
Length of the Sentence depends on the Seriousness of the Injury
- Section 325 of the Penal Code carries a punishment of imprisonment which may extend to 7 years, and the offender shall also be liable to fine. Section 326Aof the same Code provides for an imprisonment for a term which may extend to twice of the maximum term for which he would have been liable on conviction for the offence under Section 323, 324, 325 0r 335 notwithstanding any other punishment provided for that offence.
- Section 326 of the Penal Code was introduced to provide adequate protection against domestic violence, and to deter such abusive behaviour by increasing the maximum punishment for domestic violence offences. Reading Section 325 and section 326Aof the Penal Code, the court has a discretion in deciding on the length of the term of imprisonment up to 14 years.
- The punishment of offenders in the cases prosecuted under Section 325 should also depend on the seriousness of the injury.
- In this case, the victim suffered undisplaced nasal bone fracture. She did not suffer any form of permanent disability or scarring from the attacks. The injuries sustained did not endanger the life of the victim. Hence, this court opines that the imposition of a more lenient term of imprisonment can be considered.
325.Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt
Whoever, except in the case provided by Section 335, voluntarily causes grievous hurt, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
326A.Punishment for causing hurt to spouse, former spouse, etc.
(1) Whoever causes hurt to his spouse or former spouse, a child, an incapacitated adult or other member of the family and commits an offence under section 323, 324, 325, 326, 334 or 335 shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to twice of the maximum term for which he would have been liable on conviction for that offence under the relevant section notwithstanding any other punishment provided for that offence.
(2) For the purpose of this section, “spouse”, “child”, “incapacitated adult” and “other member of the family” have the meanings assigned to them in section 2 of the Domestic Violence Act 1994 [Act 521]
Source: Public Prosecutor v NMF  MLJU 1115
*加入 我们的“法律与你同行”FB 群组: http://bit.ly/fblawnjustice
*Like 我们的“法律与你同行” FB Page: http://bit.ly/lawnjusticefbpage
*Wilson Kuek是“法律与你同行 Law & Justice”面子书群组的创办人。“法律与你同行”是马来西亚最大的法律平台。我们为无数的平民百姓免费解除了各类的法律困扰。
*Kuek, Ong & Associates. Advocates & Solicitors. No.86-1, Jalan Mahagoni 1, Bandar Botanic, 41200 Klang, Selangor Darul Ehsan. Klang Lawyer. 巴生(吧生)律师楼。
*We have more than 15 years of experience in the legal profession. We handle matters such as commercial disputes, civil litigation, debt recovery, probate & letter of administration, will, divorce, children custody, maintenance/alimony, adoption, distribution of matrimonial assets, drafting commercial agreement, drafting sale and purchase agreement, process loan documentations, legal consultation, legal advisory, miscellaneous legal works.
#马来西亚华人律师 #Chinese Lawyer in Malaysia #Malaysia Lawyer #巴生律师 #吧生律师 #Klang Lawyer #KL律师 #吉隆坡律师 #KL Lawyer #懂华文的律师 #民事诉讼律师
#Kuek, Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong & Associates #Kuek Ong Associates #郭汪律师事务所 #郭汪律师楼
#家暴 #打太太 #打老婆 #domestic violence