Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 79 views

    Crime Against Property 2

    Uploaded by

    jackson
    The document discusses several court cases related to criminal charges: 1) One case defined robbery as a criminal taking of property through violence or threats of violence. 2) Another case found that injury does not need to be caused for a robbery charge, if violence was used primarily to facilitate a theft. 3) One case found that employees who remained on land after dismissal did not intend to annoy, as they believed they had a right to remain until their notice period ended. 4) A charge of trespassing to annoy someone was not proven, as the evidence showed the intent was to annoy the person's son, not the property owner. 5) One case increased a sentence for burglary and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Crime Against Property 2

    Uploaded by

    jackson
    79 views2 pages
    The document discusses several court cases related to criminal charges: 1) One case defined robbery as a criminal taking of property through violence or threats of violence. 2) Another case found that injury does not need to be caused for a robbery charge, if violence was used primarily to facilitate a theft. 3) One case found that employees who remained on land after dismissal did not intend to annoy, as they believed they had a right to remain until their notice period ended. 4) A charge of trespassing to annoy someone was not proven, as the evidence showed the intent was to annoy the person's son, not the property owner. 5) One case increased a sentence for burglary and

    Original Description:

    notes

    Original Title

    crime against property 2

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses several court cases related to criminal charges: 1) One case defined robbery as a criminal taking of property through violence or threats of violence. 2) Another case found that injury does not need to be caused for a robbery charge, if violence was used primarily to facilitate a theft. 3) One case found that employees who remained on land after dismissal did not intend to annoy, as they believed they had a right to remain until their notice period ended. 4) A charge of trespassing to annoy someone was not proven, as the evidence showed the intent was to annoy the person's son, not the property owner. 5) One case increased a sentence for burglary and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    79 views2 pages

    Crime Against Property 2

    Uploaded by

    jackson
    The document discusses several court cases related to criminal charges: 1) One case defined robbery as a criminal taking of property through violence or threats of violence. 2) Another case found that injury does not need to be caused for a robbery charge, if violence was used primarily to facilitate a theft. 3) One case found that employees who remained on land after dismissal did not intend to annoy, as they believed they had a right to remain until their notice period ended. 4) A charge of trespassing to annoy someone was not proven, as the evidence showed the intent was to annoy the person's son, not the property owner. 5) One case increased a sentence for burglary and

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    Karali Prasad Dutta v East Indian Railway Company

    (1928) 48 CLJ 32

    The court defined the meaning of robbery as criminal taking from the person of another or
    his existence against his self-control following by violence or putting him in terror.

    Bishambar Nath v Emperor AIR (1941)


    Oudh 476

    The court held in Bishambhar Nath v Emperor that it was not necessary,' in the
    circumstances,' to show that hurt was caused. The term 'for that end' indicated that it was
    only robbery if violence was inflicted for the primary purpose of permitting the commission
    of theft. In addition, the defendant's conduct in relation to causing injury, death or wrongful
    restraint, as well as instant fear to an individual, must be in the form of voluntary action.

    T PONNAMALAM v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

    Held: as they believed they were entitled to remain till the expiration of the month[rsquo ]s
    notice, they did not remain [lsquo ]with intent to annoy[rsquo ].
    Summary: On a charge for criminal trespass by remaining on the complainant[rsquo ]s land
    [lsquo ]with intent to annoy[rsquo ], it was proved that certain estate employees had
    threatened to strike. The manager gave them a month[rsquo ]s notice and during its
    pendency they struck. He then dismissed them summarily and ordered them to leave the
    premises within 24 hours. The manager was within his rights to do so, but the employees
    did not realize this

    IP YING WAH v PP
    Summary: The appellant was charged with an offence under s 448 of the Penal Code in that
    he committed house trespass by entering into the house of one Lum Kee with intent to
    annoy him. The evidence suggested that the accused went to the house to annoy Lum
    Kee[rsquo ]s son but there was no evidence to show that the accused entered the house to
    annoy Lum Kee. The charge was not amended, but the magistrate convicted the accused on
    the original charge. The accused made a statement from the dock and the magistrate cross-
    examined him on his statement. Charge of house-trespass with intention to annoy was not
    proven

    PP v. MOHD AZAM RAJA ABDULLAH [2012] 8 CLJ 506


    - The accused had burgled the deceased's house, and took away three pieces of bracelets
    worth between RM100 and RM200 each. His record, showed that the accused had some
    eight previous convictions on his back, of which four were for housebreaking. The court
    sentenced the accused to 14 years' imprisonment and 16 strokes of whipping
    AYOB ABDUL JABAR v. PP [1999] 8 CLJ 29 - The appellant pleaded guilty to four charges of
    house-breaking under s. 457 of the Penal Code. He was convicted and sentenced on each
    charge and the sentences were ordered to run consecutively
    HASANUDDIN BIN ABD HAMID v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
    Held, dismissing the appeal and ordering the revision of the sentences save for two charges:
    (1) In the present case, the court did no think that the sentences meted out by the learned
    magistrate could be taken as excessive in the circumstances of the cases. The appellant
    seemed to have gone on rampages in breaking into dwelling houses, vehicle and building, to
    wit, a school, and taking things to be sold for profits. It was on record that only ⅓ of the
    values of those goods taken were recovered with the balance presumably already
    consumed by the appellant and his sidekick who was still at large. As the learned magistrate
    noted, it appeared that the appellant adopted a modus operandi in carrying out his illicit
    activities. So his age was deceptive and it was obvious from the facts as admitted (see p
    166E-G). (2) The total length of imprisonment imposed by the learned magistrate on the
    appellant came up to 108 months, that was nine years. But with the order for the term to
    run concurrently the length of imprisonment to be served would only come up to 48 months
    or four years. And with remission of ⅓ effectively the appellant would only be in
    imprisonment for a period of 32 months (two years and eight months). That was contrary to
    the intention of the legislature in amending those provisions relating to the offences
    committed by the appellant wherein the      maximum terms of imprisonment were
    increased with additional fines and whipping for subsequent commissions (see p 174D-F).
    (3) The increment in punishment could only mean one thing, that is, that Parliament
    deemed it very serious the types of offences that were committed by the appellant. As to
    the view that only where violence was employed in the commission of the offence that
    whipping should be imposed, the court could not agree. The fact that Parliament had
    amended to increase the penalty for such an offence in particular upon second commission
    was indicative of its abhorrence to it (see p 174F-G). (4) In the exercise of the revisionary
    power under s 325 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the court therefore proceed to vary the
    order of the learned magistrate thereby making the custodial sentences of the appellant to
    run consecutively save for two charges that were committed at the same time and place
    (see p 175F-G).
    Summary: At the request of the learned deputy public prosecutor (‘the DPP’), the court
    heard together several appeals by the appellant against sentences imposed on him by the
    learned trial magistrate in connection with the various charges preferred against him. The
    appellant was unrepresented. At the hearing of the appeal, the appellant did not say much
    other than requesting the sentences to be reduced. He also explained why he committed
    the offences. The learned DPP on the other hand contended that the appeal should be
    dismissed as the appellant was a habitual offender and urged the court to exercise its power
    of revision as the sentences having being made to run concurrently were manifestly
    inadequate in the circumstances.

    You might also like