The document discusses several aggravating factors that prosecutors may argue and courts may consider when determining an appropriate sentence in a criminal case. These include: (1) whether the defendant helped police with their investigation; (2) the prevalence or seriousness of the offense; (3) any prior convictions or criminal record of the defendant; and (4) the position or status of the defendant. The document provides examples of cases where courts imposed heavier sentences due to aggravating factors like the seriousness of the offense, prior convictions, or the defendant holding a high-ranking position.

1. 3RD
DECEMBER 2015 - THURSDAY
CRIMINAL PRINCIPLE CODE - MID TEST
AGGRAVATING FACTORS – ON PART OF DPP
1. Aggravating factors such as helping the police to provide the police information
regarding the matter or crime occurred. Thus court will give lenient sentence.
2. Once accused pleaded guilty; D will ask first to mitigate the punishment by
talking things in favour of the accused, such as ‘my client has helped the police in
doing their job'-no criminal background'-and so on.
3. DPP will talk things in favour of public. Thus, the court will have to consider both
parties, public interest and the criminal’s interest in deciding to mitigate the
punishment.
4. Considerations are given by DPP;
a. Prevalence / Rampancy of offence; Court will take it seriously bcs of it’s
rampancy. The court will give heavy punishment so that it will be a lesson to
the public to not do the same offence (Acts as deterrence). Example; Drugs
offences, Stealing motorbike, Kidnapping, Firearms, Robbery. Its happening a
lot, thus DPP will ask the judge to give serious offence in order to make the
accused stop from doing the same offence in future. Recent unreported
case; Where 3 policeman took an Indonesian girl walking at a road and aped
her in the police station. Definitely a serious case, hence DPP will go for
deterrence in asking or the court to give heavy punishments. SC Held –
Convicted & sentenced for 12 years. When an appeal for sentence, the HC
also follow the same approach but not arguing in the sentence but gave lighter
sentence – 8 years. Lee Chow Meng v PP – Court considered the rampancy of
armed robbery, hence a heavy punishment were served to the convictions –
imprisonment, whipping and fine (Consecutively) Appeal @ HC – Same held
bcs of the seriousness of the offence.
 PP v The Ah Cheng - Acc pleaded guilty for unlawful possession of
firearms and ammunition. SC held – Given a bond. But on appeal,
imprisonment and enhance sentence 3 years for each offence.
 PP v Yeoh Eng Khuan – A drug case (s.39A) – Judge gave bond. Bond
can overwrite the sentence. On appeal, the Court gave 3 years
imprisonment bcs drug is a serious case.

2. 3RD
DECEMBER 2015 - THURSDAY
 PP v Tan Eng Hock – Case of car theft and the court gave bond. But on
appeal to HC, the court enhanced the punishment and gave 18 months
imprisonment since he pleaded guilty.
 PP v Lee Tak Keong – Gang robbery case. Sentenced to 2 years
imprisonment and ordered to pay RM50 compensation. On appeal, the
punishment becomes heavier – 5 years imprisonment + 6 strokes and
RM50 compensation.
 Cheong Ah Cheow v PP – A betting case. The court gave a maximum
sentence of fine RM20,000 bcs of its rampancy.
b. Previous Conviction / Bad Record.
c. Since a previous conviction sentence will be much more heavier.
 PP v Jafar bin Daud – 8 months imprisonment for possession of 0.21gm
heroin. DPP appeal bcs he got 5 previous convictions. Out of 2 of it was
drugs offence. Thus court enhanced it to 18 months.
 Sussain & Ors v PP – They have a previous conviction, the court went on
the basis that court will not take the previous offence seriously. Bcs the
present case is not a serious case.
d. Position of Status of Offender.
Can work two ways – Bcs of the high ranking thus he should not be given a
heavier punishment/ Bcs always lend a helping hand and etc.
 Datuk Harun Idris v PP – 1st Acc was a Menteri Besar Selangor and was
charged for forgery and helping for CBT. DPP had used a position against
him. Thus, the FC decided in enhanced the sentence bcs of holding a high
post and should be given a good example to public. DPP had used the
position against the accused.
 PP v Dato Tan Cheng Swee & Anor – Acc was the commissioner of the
Malacca municipal council. Due to the hold of a high position the court
had followed the above case. Thus punishment severe.
 PP v Tan Koon Swan – Acc as the Member of Parliament and does not
deny that he has done a lot for MCA. But the court said bcs of CBT the

3. 3RD
DECEMBER 2015 - THURSDAY
court did not considered the facts and gave 2 years imprisonment. Once
holding good post, even done bad things, the court will not consider.
 Tan Sri Abdul Rahman Mohd Noor v PP - IGP had punched Anuar.
Lawyer mitigated that he is the head of police, served a lot to the country,
law and peace controlling but still the court gave 2/3 months
imprisonment.
 Mohd Khir Toyo v PP – Bcs of holding a high post. And gave
imprisonment. Proposed for 2 years foc of dental services for the public –
court will take into consideration but at last not allowed and gave sentence.
 If have a high post – if the offence was negligence or anything that is not a
serious court will consider a lighter punishment.
e. The Use of Force
Whether they were violent of not?? Case in Alor Setar – Acc kidnapped the
boy and asked him to stay in the drain. Court considered as a bad treatment to
the victim. If you use force to the victim thus, the sentence will be heavier. In
one case, acc treated the victim very well and the court had considered this
matter. Hence, the court gave a lighter punishment.
 PP v Muhd Safian B Abdullah & Anor – Acc had wounded the victim and
took a rope and strangled the victim.The court gave a maximum sentence.
f. Mode of Committing Offence
If brutality – heavy sentence will be imposed. The court will consider
‘penipuan'.
 Jaginder Singh v PP – Acc was giving false evidence. Court convicted and
gave him a maximum 2 years sentence.
 MAXIMUM SENTENCE (FINAL) - 1984 2 MLJ 133 - Accused was
charged under section 211 of the Penal Code. Appellant was sentenced 2
years imprisonment and appeal. The court took it seriously as giving a
false statement. [Section 422 of CPC – Section to cure things. Example if
there's mistake. For irregularity mistake (minor) – this section is to save
the prosecution. Thus, the case is not null. – if serious cannot cure thru this
section]

4. 3RD
DECEMBER 2015 - THURSDAY