KHANTAN A/L NAMASIVAYAM v Pendakwa Raya (W-05(M)-117-03/2022)

DINESWARAN A/L SIVALINGAM - APPELLANTS - CRIMINAL APPEAL No: W-05(M)-116-03/2022 LOGAN A/L NAMASIVAYAM - - CRIMINAL APPEAL NO: W-05(M)-117-03/2022 KHANTAN A/L NAMASIVAYAM - - [In the Matter of the High Court of Malaya at Kuala Lumpur In the State of Federal Territory, Malaysia

Khantan a/l Namasivayam

Logan a/l Namasivayam

Vikneswaran a/l Kalimuthu

Nagarajan a/l Alagasan

Dineswaran a/l Sivalingan] CORAM: MOHAMED ZAINI BIN MAZLAN, HMR AZMI BIN ARIFFIN, HMR NOORIN BINTI BADARUDDIN, HMR JUDGMENT Introduction [1] This is an appeal against the conviction and sentence of the five (5) appellants on the charge under section 302 of the Penal Code. [2] At the close of the prosecution’s case, the learned trial judge found that the prosecution had established a prima facie case and all the appellants were called to enter their defence. [3] The appellants gave evidence under oath and at the end of the defence case, the learned trial judge found that the appellants failed to raise a reasonable doubt in the prosecution’s case and convicted the appellants for murder. They were each sentenced to death. [4] Being dissatisfied with the said decision, the five appellants appeal to this court. [5] At the start of the party’s submission, the learned deputy public prosecutor informed us that they have accepted the five appellants representation for the charge to be reduced from one of murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under section 304(a) of the Penal Code. [6] The amended charge was read and explained to the appellants and they pleaded guilty to the said charge. [7] Hence, the appeal before us was only in respect of the sentence. [8] We will for convenience in this appeal, refer the five appellants in the manner they were referred to in the High Court. The Charge [9] The charge preferred against all the five accused reads as follows: “Bahawa kamu bersama-sama dengan seorang lagi yang masih bebas pada 15.08.2017 jam lebih kurang 11:00 malam di sebuah pondok pengawal berhampiran Blok H, Taman Kejiranan, Jalan Ayer Jerneh, PPR Sungai Bonus, di dalam Daerah Wangsa Maju, di dalam Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur bagi mencapai niat bersama kamu, telah melakukan pembunuhan terhadap Ragesh Rao a/l Meriayah (No. K/P: 860617-38-7269). Oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan kesalahan di bawah seksyen 302 Kanun Keseksaan dan dibaca bersama seksyen 34 Kanun Keseksaan.” The Prosecution’s Case [10] The events which led to the murder of the deceased may be divided into three. First is the event at a hotel, second is the event at the bus stop at Section 10, Wangsa Maju and third is the event at Sungai Bonus where the deceased was eventually found dead. First event [11] The first event began on the evening of 15.08.2017 with the 3rd accused, Navin a/l Gopalan (PW16) and two other Indian males, called “Boy” and “Ravi” setting off to Section 10, Wangsa Maju at between 6.00 to 6.30 pm for a continued drinking session. They departed from a hotel where they had earlier been drinking as well while PW16 was having his tattoo done. They found a spot at a bus stop at Section 10, Wangsa Maju and lounged there. Second event [12] According to PW16, at the bus stop “Boy” called up the 4th accused and asked him to join them drinking and later the 4th accused came over. Later, “Boy” received a telephone call from the 1st accused, asking for his whereabouts. Naturally, “Boy” asked the 1st accused to join in as well and for the 1st accused to take the deceased with him. Moments later, the 1st accused arrived with the deceased and the 2nd accused had tagged along. This was the second event. [13] According to PW16, at the bus stop the 3rd accused, the 4th accused and “Boy” asked the deceased why he took the money. It was disclosed in evidence that the deceased purportedly owed the 1st and 2nd accused’s parents some money and has yet to pay up. The deceased denied taking the money. PW16 then heard the deceased telling them that he wanted to go to the back of an abandoned shed to ease himself. The deceased started to move away from the crowd but then he suddenly bolted. Seeing this, the 1st accused told PW16, the 2nd accused and the 3rd accused to give a chase. [14] The 1st accused himself took a ride with PW16 on a motorcycle and searched for the deceased. They found the deceased hiding beside a tree near some shrubs by the roadside. When the deceased saw them coming, he ran away. The 1st accused gave a pursuit and managed to get hold of the deceased. Once the 1st accused got hold of the deceased, he called up the 2nd accused. The 2nd accused and the 3rd accused then went over to the spot where the deceased was held by the 1st accused. [15] According to PW16 the deceased looked terrified at that time. PW16 saw the 1st accused had already grabbed the deceased by his shirt and held on to the deceased to prevent him from making a quick dash again. The 3rd accused then pulled the deceased up to get him to mount on the motorcycle but the deceased refused. The deceased looked frightened. After much difficulty, they managed to pull the deceased onto the motorcycle, sandwiched between the 2nd and 3rd accused. They then made their way back to the bus stop. [16] After arriving at the bus stop, PW16 and the 1st accused went out to get some booze. Later, the 1st accused received a telephone call asking him to go to Sungai Bonus. After getting the booze, off they went to Sungai Bonus. This is the third event. Third event [17] When they arrived at Sungai Bonus, PW16 said he saw the 4th accused, “Boy”, “Ravi” and the deceased were already there in a car. The deceased alighted from the car and the 4th accused told the deceased to sit in front of an abandoned shed. The 1st and 4th accused were seen badgering the deceased. [18] According to PW16 the 1st accused looked very upset. The deceased was petrified and pleaded to be let off. After that the deceased went silent. Suddenly, the 3rd accused kicked the deceased in the back. PW16 saw the deceased took a deep gasp as a result of the kick as if he was in great pain. [19] This particular incident was recorded by PW16 using his handphone. He was instructed to do so by the 4th accused. According to PW16, the 4th accused instructed him to record the admission which purportedly was about to be made by the deceased. This recording was soon deleted from the handphone by PW16. PW16 then went to the back of the abandoned shed to have a smoke. When he returned, PW16 said he saw the 1st and 4th accused were still drinking their booze. [20] When they were done drinking, PW16 said he saw the 1st and 3rd accused continued to beat up the deceased. Seeing this, PW16 moved in to stop them. Suddenly, the 3rd accused took his motorcycle and rode towards the front end of the guardhouse. When the 3rd accused came back, he had a baton with him. The 3rd accused later hit the deceased on his head with the baton. According to PW16, the 3rd accused hit the deceased very hard with the baton. Again, PW16 moved in and snatched the baton from the 3rd accused’s hand and threw it aside. PW16 said afterwards he saw the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th accused kept on beating the deceased to a pulp. [21] After they were done with the deceased, the 1st accused, 3rd accused and “Boy” continued drinking and the 3rd accused took his motorcycle and rode away. Moments later, the 3rd accused came back to the scene with the 5th accused. By then, they ran out of booze and the 1st accused gave some money to the 5th accused for him to get more. When the 5th accused got back, they continued drinking and then turned to the deceased again to give him another round of beating. [22] After this beating, PW16 said the deceased fell unconscious. The 4th accused then told them to get the deceased up and put him in the Perodua Axia. The 4th accused used the Perodua Axia as his ride to provide private-hire car services under Grab. Not content with the beatings, the 4th accused took his chance and gave the deceased a few slaps on his face just before getting him into the car. The 3rd accused joined in the fray and gave the deceased a few blows and kicks which lasted for a few minutes. This resulted in the deceased falling out of the car. [23] “Boy” then told PW16, the 3rd, 4th and 5th accused to pick up the deceased and carry him to the abandoned shed. “Boy” said they can all go back once the deceased is put there. At that time the deceased was still unconscious. The abandoned shed turned out to be an abandoned security guardhouse. The deceased was found [24] Security at the area where the deceased was left unconscious was under the purview of Syarikat Kawalan Keselamatan Aman Network. At the material time, Dinaggara Cheran a/l Elachran (PW9) was the Operations Executive. According to PW9, the next morning on 16.08.2017 at about 6.30 am he received a telephone call from one of his security guards, Dineswaran. Dineswaran informed him that he saw a man lying unconsciously at the security guardhouse. PW9 then told Dineswaran to call for an ambulance while he got himself ready to go to the scene. [25] That day, Corporal Mohammad Anuar bin Sulaiman (PW8) was manning the Malaysian Emergency Response Services (MERS) 999- Emergency Hotline. At about 8.25am, PW8 received an emergency call from Dineswaran. According to PW8, Dineswaran told him that he saw a man lying unconscious in the vicinity of Block H of the PPR Apartment at Sungai Bonus. The man had injuries on his face. PW8 relayed the information to Corporal Asrul who was on duty at the Wangsa Maju Police Command Centre and to duty officer ASP Zaini for follow-up action and then lodged a police report vide Setapak Report No. 12845/17 (Exhibit P14). Arrival of investigating officer and forensics [26] At about 8.45am, the investigating officer, ASP Tan Kim Por (PW19), went to the scene. Upon arrival, PW19 said he saw a number of police officers were already there. The forensics team arrived moments later. PW19 said he saw a lifeless male Indian lying at the entrance of an abandoned security guardhouse. PW19 instructed the photographer, Corporal Mohammad Nasir bin Soib (PW3) to take photographs. According to PW19, there were no CCTV camera in the area. [27] After the forensics team completed their tasks at the scene, the male Indian was taken to the Kuala Lumpur Hospital for post-mortem. The deceased’s father, Meriayah a/l Ramuloo (PW1), came from Taiping, Perak after being informed of the incident by the police. At the Kuala Lumpur Hospital, PW1 identified the deceased as his son, Ragesh Rao a/l Meriayah. According to PW19, he was later informed by the Officer in-Charge of the Jalan Tun Razak Police Station, ASP Fauzi, that the deceased was 31 years old Ragesh Rao a/l Meriayah (NRIC No. 860617-38-7269). Post-mortem [28] The deceased was brought to the Kuala Lumpur Hospital on at about 12.20 noon. The post-mortem was carried out by Dr. Ahmad Hafizam bin Hasmi (PW14) two days after the incident on 17.08.2017 at about 8.50am. Prior to the post-mortem, the deceased has been earlier identified by his own cousin, Vicknesh Rau a/l Subramaniam (NRIC No.811113-08-6939) and PW19. In the post-mortem, PW14 confirmed that the cause of death was “severe head injuries due to multiple blunt force trauma”. The post-mortem report was tendered as Exhibit P56. [29] In the post-mortem, PW14 found several external and internal injuries on the deceased. Before certifying the deceased’s cause of death, PW14 made the following summary and conclusion based on the post-mortem which he has conducted: “(i) Saya telah dimaklumkan oleh polis bahawa si mati dijumpai mati pada pagi 16.08.2017 di kawasan Taman Ayer Jernih;

(ii) Bedah siasat telah dijalankan pada 17.08.2017 jam 8.50 pagi di Jabatan Perubatan Forensik, Hospital Kuala Lumpur;

(iii) Bedah siasat menunjukkan terdapat cedera-cedera benda tumpul pada muka, kepala, badan dan anggota-anggota badan si mati;

(iv) Kecederaan utama pada si mati adalah cedera-cedera benda tumpul pada muka dan kepala di mana ia menyebabkan pendarahan bawah selaput otak (subdural dan subarachnoid haemorrhage), bengkak otak dan akhirnya membawa kepada kematiannya;

Pendarahan bawah selaput otak ini adalah cedera baru berdasarkan warna pendarahan yang merah gelap dan tidak melekat pada selaput otak;

(vi) Cedera-cedera pada muka dan kepala ini berpadanan dengan cedera akibat pukulan menggunakan benda tumpul dan keras seperti kayu, batu, besi, helmet atau sebagainya;

(vii) Cedera-cedera pada kepala dan muka si mati tidak berpadanan dengan cedera akibat perbuatan sendiri; dan

(viii) Pemeriksaan ginjal kanan menunjukkan terdapat penyakit batu karang tetapi ia bukan penyebab kematian si mati.” The arrests [30] On the instructions of PW19, three days later the 3rd accused was arrested by Inspector Dinesh a/l Ambalagan (PW10) on 18.08.2017. The arrest was made near Block F of the PPR Apartment, Sungai Bonus, Setapak, Kuala Lumpur. During the arrest, PW10 seized from the 3rd accused a “Lenovo” handphone. However, upon being analysed by the police audio-video forensics analyst, the handphone did not contain any incriminating contents. Based on information, PW10 also seized a baton (Exhibit P23) at the security guardhouse at Taman Kejiranan, Sungai Bonus. [31] The arrests of other accused persons took place as follows:

the 1st accused was arrested on 17.08.2017 two days after the incident at Block K-00-07, Perumahan Awam Desa Rejang, Persiaran Rejang, Setapak Jaya, Kuala Lumpur;

the 2nd accused was arrested on 17.08.2017 two days after the incident in front of the TA Hotel at Jalan Pudu, Kuala Lumpur;

the 4th accused was arrested on 19.08.2017 four days after the incident when he surrendered himself to PW19; and

the 5th accused was arrested on 21.08.2017 six days after the incident in the vicinity of Block J21, Rumah Panjang Jinjang Utara, Kuala Lumpur. Video recording. [32] The incident recorded by PW16 in his handphone which was deleted whereby the deceased was kicked and beaten up, managed to be salvaged and recovered. The deleted recording in PW16’s handphone was forensically analysed by the police audio-video forensics analyst, Inspector Mior Samsul bin Abdul Rahman (PW15), and the report of the analysis is produced as Exhibit P71. [33] The video recording (Exhibit P74) salvaged from PW16’s handphone was played in Court and PW16 identified the deceased as the person who was kicked and beaten up in the video. Identification of the deceased [34] Before the learned counsel continue with his submissions, PW1 directed for the Court Recording Transcription (CRT) on the date PW1 gave evidence to be played in Court as a matter of refresher since PW1 gave his evidence before another High Judge on 13.11.2018. The CRT shows PW1 testified that he identified the deceased as his son, Ragesh Rao a/l Meriayah. The identification was made at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital upon PW1’s arrival from Taiping, Perak. The Case for The Defence The 1st and 2nd accused [35] On the evening of 15.08.2017 the 1st accused went home as soon as he finished work. Between 9.00 pm to 9.30 pm he had beer at home and then hit the sack. The 2nd accused is the younger brother of the 1st accused. On the same day, the 2nd accused came home late as he had a meeting at the office. He arrived at about 8.30 pm. The 2nd accused said he saw the 1st accused had a nightcap and soon afterwards, both of them retired to their own room, respectively. [36] According to the 1st accused, he was arrested two days later on 17.08.2017 on suspicion of his involvement in a murder case. At that time, he was together with his mother, Premah d/o Subramaniam, at their groceries shop at the Perumahan Awam Desa Rejang, Setapak. The 1st accused and his mother were then brought by the police to the Wangsa Maju Police District Headquarters. When the police came for them, the 1st accused said the police also had his father, Namasivayam s/o D. Saminathan, with them. According to the 2nd accused, he got to know that his brother (the 1st accused) and his parents had been arrested by the police. The 2nd accused then went to the Wangsa Maju Police District Headquarters later that evening at about 6.00 pm. When he arrived there and informed the police of his intention to inquire about the arrest of his brother and parents, he was instead arrested as well. The police told the 2nd accused that he was arrested in connection with an investigation into a murder case. The 3rd accused [37] According to the 3rd accused, he was at a budget hotel in the area of Sri Rampai, Setapak on 15.08.2017. He was there together with “Boy”, Navin and Ravi to get tattoos done on their body. The 3rd accused said he first received a telephone call from “Boy” the night before on 14.08.2017. Half an hour later, “Boy” came and picked him up to go to the hotel. They had their tattoos done at the hotel from 1.00 am right up to 8.00 pm the next day. While having their tattoos done, they had beers. “Boy” paid for the hotel room and the beers. They took beers to withstand the tattooing pain. [38] When they were about to leave the hotel at about 8.00 pm, “Boy” received a telephone call. According to “Boy’, the person at the other end of the line wanted “Boy” to come over to a certain place. The 3rd accused and the rest then followed “Boy” 40 in a Toyota Vios driven by “Boy”. On their way, the 3rd accused told “Boy” that he cannot stand the tattooing pain and wanted to go home instead. “Boy” then sent the 3rd accused home to the PPR Sg. Bonus and then went on his way with Navin and Ravi. When he got home, the 3rd accused said he went straight to bed but he did see his cousin, Dineswaran, there. [39] Two days later on 17.08.2017 at about 12.00 midnight, the 3rd accused was arrested at his grandmother’s house. According to the 3rd accused, he went there because his mother asked him to come over to celebrate his birthday which fell on 22.08.2017. The 4th accused [40] The 4th accused was married to Tracy Manzano (DW7) and have 4 children. At the material time, the 4th accused drove a private-hire car for Grab. It was a dark blue Perodua Axia bearing registration number WB 2258 J (“Axia”). [41] On 15.08.2017, the 4th accused received a telephone call from “Boy” at about 7.30pm. In the telephone conversation, “Boy” had asked the 4th accused to join him and shared with the 4th accused the location for the meet- up. The 4th accused then went to the shared location. It was a spot beside a bus stop opposite the Sekolah Kebangsaan Seksyen 10, Wangsa Maju. When he reached there, the 4th accused saw “Boy” together with a few others were encircling someone who was in a sitting position. The 4th accused said he later found out that that someone was the deceased. Upon seeing the 4th accused, “Boy” came over towards him together with “Ravi”. [42] The 4th accused said he asked “Boy” what was happening but “Boy” and “Ravi” invited the 4th accused for a glass of whisky instead. “Boy” then told the 4th accused that they had “caught” an Indian guy who had cheated certain Indian traders of some money. It was the deceased. “Boy” also said that he had managed to “settle the matter”. The 4th accused explained that he knew “Boy” was involved in gangsterism and had many underlings. These underlings worked as parking attendants, as bouncers at pubs and dealt with illegal lottery. “Boy” was also involved in collecting protection fees for areas “within his control”. [43] According to the 4th accused, the Indian guys whom he first saw encircling the deceased were slapping the deceased. The 4th accused, “Boy” and “Ravi” then moved over to the spot where the deceased sat. As soon as they were there, “Boy” gave the deceased a tight slap and gave him a hard swearing. The 4th accused said he did not recognise the rest in the crowd because they had never talked to each other and some of them were wearing motorcycle helmets. [44] The 4th accused said he disagreed with how the deceased was being treated by “Boy” and his friends” and asked for the deceased to be surrendered to the police or let off. “Boy” then said he would send the deceased to the police and picked up his mobile phone to call his “police friend” asking where the deceased should be sent to. Seeing this, the deceased pleaded with “Boy” not to send him over to the police. [45] The 4th accused said he did not want “Boy” and his friends to keep roughing up the deceased and had offered to send the deceased either to the nearest station for the deceased to go back to his hometown in Taiping or to the nearest police station. At this time, the deceased asked to be sent to the nearest express bus station. However, the deceased said he did not know the departure time for the bus to Taiping and the 4th accused told the deceased to use his mobile phone to call his father to ask about the departure time. The deceased grabbed the 4th accused’s mobile phone and called up his father. The deceased then said the last bus to Taiping from Kuala Lumpur would depart the Duta station at 11.00 pm. The 4th accused then said he agreed to send the deceased to the bus station. [46] After settling the matter, the 4th accused, “Boy” and “Ravi” continued with their drinking session at the bus stop opposite the school. At that time, the 4th accused saw the crowd had dispersed leaving behind only two of them. According to the 4th accused, the two were seen chatting and cracking jokes with each other while having their share of booze. [47] While chatting with “Boy” and “Ravi”, “Boy” explained to the 4th accused the reasons why he had the deceased clobbered up. The 4th accused said according to “Boy” the deceased had bolted and hid in the underbrush beside the main road. “Boy” then had his boys to look for the deceased and got him captured. After the deceased was captured, the boys had clobbered the deceased. One of them, Navin (PW16), had that event recorded on his mobile phone and PW16 had sent the recording to the 4th accused on the 4th accused’s mobile phone. The 4th accused watched the video recording on his mobile phone. According to the 4th accused, the video recording which he watched on his mobile phone lasted more than 2 minutes whereas the video clip (Exhibit P74) that was shown in Court during trial was merely ¼ of the original video clip. [48] After a while, “Boy” and “Ravi” wanted to move to another place. The 4th accused was asked to take the deceased in his car together with two other guys whereas “Boy” and “Ravi” rode in another car. The 4th accused followed “Boy” until they reached Taman Kejiranan Sungai Bonus. They found a spot in front of an abandoned guard house about 10-minute drive away from the last spot. There, the 4th accused continued his chat with “Boy” about his work whereas the deceased and the others sat farther away in the opposite. The 4th accused said he did not know what happened to the deceased. Their drinking session continued. [49] At about 10.15 pm, “Boy” asked the 4th accused to send the deceased to the Duta station since the last bus to Taiping would depart at 11.00 pm. At that time, the other guys were jeering at the deceased and making fun of him. One of them had a baton rubbed against the deceased’s bottom. The deceased retaliated and whisked the baton away. “Boy” suddenly got agitated and landed some blows onto the deceased. The 4th accused said he tried to fend off the attack by pulling “Boy” away from the deceased. The 4th accused said he then snatched the baton from “Boy” and threw it away from the guard house. [50] The 4th accused said he then brought his car to the front and told the deceased to hop in. The 4th accused wanted to send the deceased to the Duta station. Suddenly “Boy” turned around and said to his boys that the deceased cannot go home. They pulled the deceased out of the car. The 4th accused had no choice but had to turn the engine off and got out of the car. The 4th accused said “Boy” was drunk and had thrown his outrage towards the deceased for no apparent reason. The 4th accused quickly pulled “Boy” to the side. Before 12.00 midnight, the security guards came over and told them to disperse. The 4th accused then left. [51] The 4th accused said he left at about 11.45pm. When he left, the deceased was fine and not injured at all. He was sure the deceased was fine as he could hear the deceased sang when asked by the boys. He reached home at about 1.00 am after stopping by at the7-Eleven convenience store for a couple cans of beer. [52] The 4th accused said he was in Kluang, Johor on 17.09.2017 when his mother informed him that his wife was picked up by the police. He rushed back to Kuala Lumpur on the same day and tried to look for “Boy” but to no avail. Sometime later, the 4th accused received a telephone call from “Boy”. “Boy” was using a different number. “Boy” said he wanted to disappear for a while and wanted the 4th accused to do the same. The 4th accused refused and instead asked his lawyer to get in touch with the investigating officer. Two days later on 19.08.2017, the 4th accused went to the Wangsa Maju Police District Headquarters to meet the investigating officer and he was arrested there. The 5th accused [53] The 5th accused worked as a security guard with Syarikat Aman Network Security since July 2017. At the material time, he was stationed at Taman Rekreasi PPR Sungai Bonus, Setapak. The 3rd accused is his cousin and stayed together with the 5th accused and his parents. [54] On 15.08.2017 the 5th accused was on the night shift. It started from 7.00pm and ended on 7.00am the next day (16.08.2017). According to the 5th accused, he had already asked to come in late and requested a colleague to hold the fort pending his arrival. In return, the 5th accused said he will continue to work after his shift ended until his colleague turned up. [55] While at home, his cousin, the 3rd accused, came home at about 8.30pm. The 3rd accused looked tired and went to bed straightaway. After taking shower and dinner, the 5th accused said he went out to work. He had to walk because his motorcycle broke down. It only took him between 10 to 15 minutes from his house to the main guard post. When he arrived at about 12.00 midnight, his colleague who stood in his stead went home. The 5th accused was on night shift together with another colleague, Jayendran. [56] That night there were no cars coming into or exiting out of the area. The 5th accused also did not make his rounds to clock in at the check points as he did not have a motorcycle. Jayendran too did not have a motorcycle. So, both of them just stood guard at the main guard post. [57] At about 12.30am or 1.00am, two patrol officers from the Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur came for their regular inspection. They were allowed in. One of them checked the log book whereas the other officer patrolled the area on his motorcycle. A few minutes later, that officer came back to the main guard post and said everything was “OK”. After making annotations on the log book, both the officers left. For the 5th accused, it was a normal night shift with no incidents. [58] When his colleague came in the next day at about 8.15am for the morning shift, before heading home the 5th accused and his colleague went out to patrol the area on his colleague’s motorcycle. When they reached the abandoned guard post, the 5th accused said he saw a man lying at the door. The 5th accused came down from the motorcycle to have a look. He saw an unconscious Indian male with injury marks on his face. The 5th accused said he shouted at the man to get up but there was no response. He then called up the 999-emergency number to report the incident. After that, he called up his employer, Mr. Dina, to inform him of the same. Meanwhile, his colleague returned to the main guard post to continue with his duties. [59] About ½ hour later, the ambulance arrived and checked on the man. The officials from the ambulance informed him that the man had passed on and that the case will be handed over to the police. Soon after, the police arrived and the 5th accused went home. About an hour later, the 5th accused said he was called to the scene by Mr. Dina. Conclusion [60] Having considered the facts of the case, public interest, the mitigation by the learned counsel on behalf of the appellants, we unanimously set aside the death sentence and substituted with a conviction under section 299 of the Penal Code punishable under section 304(a) read together with section 34 of same Act. They were each sentenced to twelve (12) years imprisonment from date of arrest (17 August 2017). The sentence imposed is in tandem with the current trend of sentencing. Date: 1st October 2025 - sgd - Azmi bin Ariffin Judge Court of Appeal Malaysia Counsel For the 1st Appellant (Nagarajan A/L Alagasan) :

Gabriel Sassayan

Seluadorai [Shan & Selva] For the 2nd Appellant (Vikneswaran A/L Kalimuthu) : 1. Afifuddin Ahmad Hafifi 2. Aina Melina Johan Arif Lim [Salehuddin Saidin & Assoc] For the 3rd Appellant (Dineswaran A/L Sivalingam) :

Aliff Bolkin 2. Nur Nabihah Nabil [Revin Kumar & Bolkin] For the 4th Appellant (Logan a/l Namasivayam) :

Datuk N. Sivanathan 2. Sharifah Annafiza Al-Shahab [Sivananthan] For the 5th Appellant (Khantan A/L Namasivayam) :

Datuk N. Sivanathan 2. Sharifah Annafiza Al-Shahab [Sivananthan] For the Respondents : Tetralina Bin Ahmed Fauzi [Deputy Public Prosecutor]