second part of criminal force. presented before Encik Mohd Shukree bin Mhd Salleh

1. Non-Fatal Offences:
Criminal Force
– cont’d
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 1

2. Requirements of Criminal
Force
CRIMINAL
FORCE
=
Intention / Knowledge of
Application of Force applied without
Force + causing the ulterior + consent
object
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 2

3. Mohamed Abdul Kader v PP
[1967] 1 MLJ 86
Fact:
The accused had been convicted of using criminal force to
a public servant to prevent him from discharging his duty.
The evidence was that the appellant who had a chopper in
his hand had said “If you go in I will hammer you”.
Held:
as no force was in fact used the appellant could not be
convicted of using criminal force
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 3

4. Ng Eng Huat v PP
[1988] 1 MLJ 417
Fact:
the appellant reversed his car very quickly which caused
complainant to engage his reverse gear and reverse his car
but his car was hit by the appellant's car.
Held:
it was clear that the act of the appellant of reversing his
car was not a negligent act but an intentional and
deliberate act by committing the offence of using criminal
force
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 4

5. Jai Ram
(1914) 15 Cr LJ 231
Held:
raising a stick to hit another person was criminal force if it
caused the other to run away to save himself or even just
to move slightly to avoid of being struck.
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 5

6. Tan Beng Chye v PP
[1966] 1 MLJ 173, FC
Fact:
the appellant had taken the complainant to some bushes where he
took off his shorts and lowered his inner pants to his knees. He
then made the complainant take off her coat and trousers, leaving
her in her knickers, which she refused to take off. An old Chinese
man then came to the place and the complainant shouted to him
for help. Thereupon the appellant pulled up his inner pants, put
on his shorts and started to run while buttoning them.
Held:
An attempt to remove her knickers was sufficient evidence of use
of force to outrage her modesty
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 6

7. Raja Izzuddin Shah v PP
[1979] 1 MLJ 270
Fact:
the complainant, a public servant was slapped, dragged by the
shirt and pushed against the wall by accused while performing his
duties.
Held:
Accused was convicted of an offence under Section 353 of Penal
Code.
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 7

8. Ismail v PP
[1963] 1 MLJ 208
Fact:
the appellant, a postman was stated to approach the complainant,
Mek and from his expression, Mek could see he had an intention
to disturb. She went into her house as she had only a sarong on
tied up to her breast at that time. He asked Mek whether she was
single or married. Mek told him she was married. He then pulled
out $5 and said: "Even if you are married take this money“.
Held:
the words uttered by the appellant are so vague that one cannot
say with certainty that there has been a solicitation for sexual
intercourse.
azrin hafiz / LAW 555 / Nov 2012 8