Trial Jurisdiction

2nd Class Magistrate 1st Class Magistrate Sessions Court High Court Court of Federal Court
Appeal
-S88 SCA 1948: can -S85 SCA1948: -S63 SCA 1948: -S22(1) CJA 1964: - Article 126 Federal
try offences can try offences: can try any offence Can try all offences Constitution and S13
punishable with a) Punishment with except those and the offences CJA 1964 provide
a) Imprisonment Imprisonment not punishable with under Chapter VI of that the FC does not
not exceeding 12 exceeding 10 death the Penal Code and conduct criminal
months or years or under any written trials but may punish
b) A fine only b) Punishable with a -S30(1) CJA 1964: law for contempt of court
*The proviso to S88 fine only or Sessions court may
provides that the 2nd c) Under S392 refer any
Class Magistrate can Penal Code or Constitutional
take necessary steps d) Under S457 matter to the HC
to adjourn the case Penal Code
for trial by 1st Class
Magistrate, if he is of -S83 SCA 1948:
the opinion that the Magistrate can:
punishment power a) Issue warrant;
that he possesses summons or other
would be inadequate processes of the
court
-S117(2) CPC: may b) Make orders
issue detention or realating to
remand orders adjourments,
remand, bail and
transfer of the
case to the
Sessions Court

-S9 CPC
Sentencing Jurisdiction
2nd Class 1st Class Magistrate Sessions Court High Court Court of Appeal
Magistrate
-S89 SCA 1948 : -S87(1) SCA 1948: may punish the -S64 SCA 1948: -S22(2) CJA 1964: -S60(1) CJA 1964:
may punish the offender with A Sessions court can pass a HC may pass at the hearing of
offender with a) Imprisonment x exceeding 5 years any sentence allowed by any sentence the appeal, the
a) Imprisonment or law except the sentence allowed by law COA may confirm,
x exceeding 6 b) A fine x exceeding RM10k or of death. The court may reverse/ vary the
months or c) Whipping up to max of 12 stokes also impose the sentence decision of the HC/
b) A fine not d) A combination of (a)-(c) of whipping but in no order a retrial.
exceeding case the whipping exceed
RM1k or *Exceptions: may exceed the the statutory minimum of
c) both sentencing jurisdiction 24 strokes in the case of
1) Proviso to s87(1) SCA 1948 the an adult offender
magistrate can award in excess of #Bachik bin Abd
the power prescribed where any Rahman.
law gives him the authority
Eg:
-S118 Customs Act 1967
-S41 Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
-S6(3) Betting Ordinance 1953

2) S87(2) SCA 1948 provided the

judge knows of the accused's
previous convictions before
sentencing and records his reasons.
The judges in #Tengku Hitam and
#Abdul Wahab pointed out that
the prosecution has a duty to
choose the proper court to charge
the accused
Appellate Jurisdiction
High Court Court of Appeal
S26 CJA 1964: -COA only has appellate jurisdiction as provided for
HC shall hear under:
appeals from a) Article 121(1B) Federal Constitution: it can hear
subordinate appeals from the decisions of the HC
courts b) S50(1) CJA 1964: it can hear and determine appeals
against decisions of the HC
Matters which may be appealed
1) S50(2) CJA 1964: where the case originates from the
Magistrate Court, matter which may be appealed are
only on Q of law (for accused)
2) However in #Pasupathy Kanagasaby, the HC held
that if the Prosecution appeals, no leave is required
under S50(3) CJA and the court may hear appeals of
both facts and law.
3) But in #PP v Mahathir Muhammad, Hishamudin
Mohd Yunus JCA held that, S50(2) CJA requires both
the PP and the accused person to confine the appeal
to Q of law only. The S50(3) CJA exempts the PP
only from the leave requirement but not the Q of law
only requirement.
4) S50(4) CJA: no leave is required by the PP or the
defence where the case originates from the SC or HC
Whether leave of COA is required
-Where the case originates from the Magistartes Court
 S50(3) CJA: If the PP appeals, only NOA but leave of
COA is required
 If defence appeals, then yes leave of COA
Federal Court
-Article 121(2) read with Article 128(3) of the Federal
Constitution: the FC can determine appeals from
decisions of the COA and the HC and may confirm,
reverse or vary any decisions or order a retrial
Cases whether appeals to the FC are allowed:
#Siow Chung Peng v PP
-2 pre-conditions must be satisfied to appeal to the FC
(i) the decision of the COA has decided on the
criminal matter
(ii) the criminal matter was decided by the HC in its
original jurisdiction
#Ahmad Zubair Hj Murshid
-FC held that the appeal to the COA and later to the
FC on a preliminary issue was clearly an abuse of the
court process as the criminal matter in the Sessions
Court has not been decided
Use of inherent power of the FC: r 137 Rules of the
Federal Court 1995
#Tan Sri Eric Chia Eng Hock v PP
-it was held that the FC may review decisions made
by the COA in the exercise of his inherent powers
under r137 to prevent injustice or to prevent an abuse
of the process of any court where there is no other
available remedy.
C/f #Sia Cheng Soon v Tengku Ismail bin Tengku
Ibrahim
-where the case originates from the SC/HC, x leave is
required by the PP/ defence
-S50(2A) CJA, an application for leave must be made
within 14 days after the decision of the HC
-when a matter ends in the COA, then the whole
matter end there, thus is unlikely to allows issues of
law to be referred to the FC by using r137
-r137 cannot be construed as another avenue to bring
a case originating in the subordinate court to the
Federal court.
#Munawar Ahamd Anees v PP
-it is quite clear that matters which originates from the
SC ends only at he COA
#Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim v PP (2014)
-held that the court's discretionary powers under s137
should not be use exercised liberally but sparingly in
very exceptional cases where a significant injustice
had probably occured.