Appeals court upholds death sentence on ex-soldier for daughter's murder
A three-member bench consisting of Justices Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim, Datuk Azman Abdullah and Datuk Azmi Ariffin dismissed an appeal by Mohammad Abdullah Mohamed against his conviction and sentence handed down by the High Court.
ALSO READ: Army sergeant charged with murdering nine-year-old daughter
DPP Datin Asmah Musa, appearing for the prosecution, and Abdullah's lawyer Afifuddin Ahmad Hafifi, confirmed the court's decision when met on Thursday (June 26).
Asmah said Justice Azmi, who delivered the court's decision, said that while the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 provides discretionary sentencing of between 30 and 40 years' jail, the court found the death sentence is appropriate after considering the aggravated and mitigating factors.
The 43-year-old former soldier was appealing against his conviction and death sentence imposed by the High Court in August 2023 for the murder of Nur Aina Nabihah Mohammad Abdullah at a house in Jalan Vista Jaya 5, Taman Vista Jaya, Lukut, Port Dickson, Negri Sembilan, between 8.30pm and 11.30pm on Jan 31, 2018.
According to the facts of the case, Abdullah had instructed Nur Aina Nabihah and her other siblings to do 500 push-ups and sit-ups as punishment for failing to perform prayers.
ALSO READ: Ex-soldier to hang for killing daughter
When Nur Aina Nabihah became too weak to continue, he stepped on her stomach with his foot. When the girl could not get up, he got angry and stepped on her stomach again. He also pushed her with his foot and kicked her forcefully.
Abdullah has one more avenue of appeal, the Federal Court. – Bernama
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Malaysiakini
2 hours ago
- Malaysiakini
Govt seeks to overturn 'negligence' verdict on probe into model's death
Authorities have filed a notice at the appellate court seeking to overturn a High Court verdict that found them negligent in investigating Dutch model Ivana Smit's death in 2017. According to the lawyer Sankara Nair, who is representing Smit's mother, Christina Carolina Gerarda Johanna Verstappen, the notice of appeal was filed by the Attorney-General's Chambers yesterday, on behalf of the inspector-general of police, investigating officer Faizal Abdullah, the home minister, and the Malaysian government.
Free Malaysia Today
4 hours ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Appellate court affirms Petaling land office unlawfully forfeited developer's land
The Court of Appeal ruled that the Petaling land office had failed to compensate the property developer for the acquisition of a plot of land in Petaling Jaya, Selangor. PUTRAJAYA : The Court of Appeal has affirmed a High Court ruling that the Petaling land office had unlawfully forfeited a plot of land from a property developer. Justice Azimah Omar said the land office failed to compensate SEA Housing Corporation Sdn Bhd for the acquisition of the 2,043.8 sq m plot of land in Petaling Jaya, Selangor, and that it had withheld evidence. Justices Nazlan Ghazali and Faizah Jamaludin also sat on the panel. In dismissing the land office's appeal, the court ordered the developer to be paid RM35,000 in costs. On April 11, 2023, High Court judge K Muniandy held that the forfeiture of the land was unlawful. Muniandy also said the land office's conduct amounted to denying the developer's constitutional right to property. SEA Housing Corporation had in 2016 discovered that it was the registered proprietor of Lot 8914 when there was a demand for outstanding arrears to be settled. The company then sought clarification from the land office and the matter was referred to the land office's technical division. Upon examination of the drawings of Lot 8914, SEA Housing Corporation was informed that the said lot did not exist as it had overlapped with an adjacent lot. This was supported by a report signed by an officer in the land office. However, sometime in August 2018, SEA Housing Corporation discovered that Lot 8914 did not overlap with the adjacent lot and was in fact a separate plot of land by itself. It also discovered that the state authority, through the land office, had forfeited Lot 8914 as a result of the developer's purported failure to pay the quit rent arrears. In December 2018, the developer submitted a petition under the National Land Code to annul the forfeiture of Lot 8914. However, the land office failed to undertake its statutory duties to hear the petition on grounds that it was filed out of time, resulting in a suit being filed in the High Court. The High Court allowed the appeal and ordered the petition to be reheard by the land office. The land office, however, informed the developer's lawyers that the petition had been dismissed and Lot 8914 would be made a public road and reserved for public purposes. SEA Housing Corporation filed a suit in February 2022 seeking various declaratory reliefs and consequential orders arising from the unlawful forfeiture. Assistant state legal advisers Khairuddin Idris and Siti Radziah Kamarudin represented the land office while lawyers Lim Kien Huat and Bryan Ching appeared for the developer.
Rakyat Post
5 hours ago
- Rakyat Post
Court Of Appeal Strikes Words ‘'Annoy'' & 'Offensive'' From Communications and Multimedia Act 1998
Subscribe to our FREE In 2022, activist Heidy Quah was given a The charge was framed under Section 233 (1) (a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, which carries a maximum fine of RM50,000 or imprisonment for up to a year or both and a further fine of RM1,000 for each day the offence is continued after conviction. Quah was allowed bail of RM2,000 with one surety. The charges against her were dropped because Judge MM Edwin Paramjothy ruled that the charges were defective and did not comply with the requirements of Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) 1998 and Sections 152 to 154 of the Criminal Procedures Code (CPC). She has since filed a civil suit to challenge the validity of the terms ''offensive'' and ''annoy'' in Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act. Today, the Court of Appeal struck out both words from the Act, ruling them unconstitutional since they go In light of the good news, Quah said she's grateful for the court because Malaysians can exercise their democratic rights. Quah believes Malaysians have the right to champion causes that are important to them without fearing being ''labelled'' as causing offense or annoyance. She explained that removing both terms from the charge protects the freedom of speech afforded to all. In Malaysia, we want to uphold the truth and sometimes there needs to be difficult conversations to be held. Activist Heidy Quah tells BFM She explained that removing both terms from the Act allows offenders to be charged for actual crimes instead of using vague and subjective reasons. This helps promote transparency and accountability. Did you know that more than 2,800 cases have been investigated under this now deemed unconstitutional law? And up to March 2023, fines amounting to RM138,250 were imposed on those found to be guilty of breaking it. Source: Communications and Digital Ministry via Dewan Rakyat — Aidila Razak (@aidilarazak) Share your thoughts with us via TRP's . Get more stories like this to your inbox by signing up for our newsletter.
