Rayuan jenayah boleh dibatalkan, dikembalikan semula

The Malaysian High Court has ruled that certain criminal appeals can be cancelled and subsequently reinstated. Putrajaya's High Court decision states that it has the authority to cancel criminal appeals when the defendant fails to receive or deliver a notice of appeal. However, the court determined that the accused party can request for the appeal to be returned to the list for consideration at a later date.

A panel of three judges delivered a three-to-one ruling that the court has the power to do so under Rule 105 of the High Court Procedures 1994, which maintains the court's existing power to prevent procedural abuse. Judge Wong Kian Kheong, who wrote the 28-page judgment, stated that allowing an appeal to remain on the court's list when there is no reasonable possibility of it being heard constitutes procedural abuse.

The decision was made in relation to two separate criminal appeals filed by the prosecution. The other judges on the panel were Judge Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz and K Muniandy. In the first appeal, the prosecution failed to deliver a notice of appeal to Nor Khairi Nosoha, one of two defendants in the case, despite being notified several times.

As a result, the appeal was dismissed on May 18. In the second appeal, only one out of four defendants attended the court when the appeal was scheduled to be heard on April 10. A warrant of arrest was issued for two other defendants, while a notice of appeal could not be delivered to another defendant. The appeal was eventually dismissed on June 18 after the case went through nine rounds of litigation.

Wong stated that the prosecution can request for both appeals to be reinstated under Rule 105, which is read in conjunction with Rule 1A, which seeks the court to act in a manner that prevents judicial injustice. He explained that the appeal can be reinstated because the merit of the appeal has not been considered by the court. According to him, there is no time limit that prevents a criminal appeal from being reinstated for hearing.

The court also ruled that the prosecution cannot challenge the cancellation of the appeal in the Federal Court as the order did not finally determine the substantive rights of all parties.