Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 241 views

    Mohamed Abdul Kader V Public Prosecutor

    Uploaded by

    Qila Zahin
    Penal Code, ss 349, 350 and 353 — Using criminal force to a public servant to prevent him from discharging his duty — Ingredients of

    Copyright:

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

    Mohamed Abdul Kader V Public Prosecutor

    Uploaded by

    Qila Zahin
    241 views1 page
    Penal Code, ss 349, 350 and 353 — Using criminal force to a public servant to prevent him from discharging his duty — Ingredients of

    Original Title

    Mohamed Abdul Kader v Public Prosecutor

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Penal Code, ss 349, 350 and 353 — Using criminal force to a public servant to prevent him from discharging his duty — Ingredients of

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    241 views1 page

    Mohamed Abdul Kader V Public Prosecutor

    Uploaded by

    Qila Zahin
    Penal Code, ss 349, 350 and 353 — Using criminal force to a public servant to prevent him from discharging his duty — Ingredients of

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Mohamed Abdul Kader v Public Prosecutor

    Judgement

    Held: as no force was in fact used the appellant could not be convicted of using criminal force

    Section 349 defines what is force and criminal force is defined in s 350. the illustration thereto
    shows that some application of force to the other party is required to amount to using criminal
    force. Assault however requires no contact with the body and s 351 says any gesture or preparation
    which causes the other person to apprehend that he who makes that gesture or preparation is about
    to use criminal force is assault.

     In this particular case, there is the so-called, movement of the appellant’s hand which was at
    that time holding a chopper followed by the words “if you go in, I will hammer you”. What
    ever that may be, certainly it did not constitute use of criminal force. It could perhaps come
    under section 503 of the Penal Code. “ whoever threatens another with any injury to his
    person, reputation, or property, or to the person or reputation of any one in whom that
    person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do
    any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is
    legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the execution of such treat, commit criminal
    intimidation” And If That gesture followed by the words could amount to criminal
    intimidation.
     The charge is that the appellant used criminal force to public servant to prevent him from
    discharging his duty.
     Therefore, after formal identification of the identity by Tan, appellant should have allowed
    and not prevented Tan in law a public servant from the execution of his duty as such public
    servant.
     Learned judge, find no evidence that Tan was prevented. It was interference of Tan from the
    words, that he would be prevented from doing so, and he did not try to enter the rear of the
    shop.
     Learned judge find that the accused had been fairly co-operative with defendant too the
    extent of producing IC to defendant that he was not likely any exercise of authority of
    defendant if he was minded to do se.
     Court allow the appeal and quash the conviction. Fine need to be refunded to the appellant
    of had been paid.

    You might also like