Negeri Sembilan police arrest wanted father who threatened son into stealing groceries from stores
WHAT initially appeared as a straightforward shoplifting incident at a Negeri Sembilan wholesale supermarket has uncovered a troubling pattern of child exploitation, with authorities discovering a young boy was systematically coerced into theft by his own father.
Police in Bahau arrested a man with an extensive criminal background after investigations revealed he had been forcing his eldest son to steal daily necessities from multiple retail locations under threat of physical harm.
The case came to light on January 14 around 11.45am when the 10-year-old boy attempted to take a 200-gram packet of instant coffee from a wholesale supermarket in Bahau. Staff intercepted the theft attempt, prompting a police report at Bahau Police Station.
Jempol district police chief Superintendent Norhisham Mustapar, speaking to China Press, explained that the initial incident led officers to the boy’s father, who was subsequently taken into custody.
Initial police inquiries uncovered a disturbing pattern of exploitation. According to Norhisham, the suspect regularly commanded and compelled his eldest son to steal everyday items from various shops across Bahau and Batu Kikir areas.
The child faced verbal abuse and threats of physical violence whenever he resisted his father’s demands, creating an environment of persistent fear that left him with no choice but to comply with the illegal activities.
“The boy was living under constant threat and intimidation from his own father,” authorities noted, highlighting the psychological impact of the sustained coercion.
Background checks on the suspect revealed significant criminal history spanning multiple years. The man has seven previous convictions involving both criminal activities and drug-related offenses.
Most notably, his record includes a prior conviction under Section 31(1)(a) of the Child Act 2001 specifically for child abuse—indicating this was not his first offense involving harm to children.
“He has been on police’s wanted list since 2021,” Norhisham confirmed, suggesting the suspect had been evading law enforcement for approximately three years before this arrest.
Authorities have launched investigations under several statutory provisions reflecting the severity and multifaceted nature of the offenses:
- Section 380 of the Penal Code for theft
- Section 109 of the Penal Code for abetment (encouraging or assisting another to commit an offense)
- Section 31(1)(a) of the Child Act 2001 for child abuse
The combination of charges addresses both the property crimes and the exploitation of a minor, with the Child Act provision carrying specific protections for vulnerable young people subjected to abuse or exploitation by caregivers.
Following the arrest and initial investigation, authorities transferred custody of the boy to his mother, removing him from the abusive situation with his father.
The placement represents an immediate protective measure while authorities continue their investigation and legal proceedings move forward against the suspect.
The case highlights concerning intersections between parental authority, criminal activity, and child welfare. When caregivers possess criminal histories involving violence or exploitation, children become particularly vulnerable to coercion into illegal activities.
Child protection experts note that children forced into theft by parents or guardians face unique trauma—they’re simultaneously victims of abuse and potentially treated as perpetrators by systems unprepared to recognize their coerced participation.
The psychological impact on children subjected to such sustained threats and forced participation in criminal activity can be long-lasting, affecting their sense of safety, trust in authority figures, and understanding of right and wrong.
Malaysia’s Child Act 2001 specifically criminalizes various forms of child abuse and exploitation, including:
- Physical abuse and threats of harm
- Forcing children to beg or engage in criminal activity
- Exposing children to situations harmful to their physical or emotional wellbeing
- Neglect and abandonment
Section 31(1)(a) under which the suspect faces charges provides specific penalties for persons who abuse, neglect, abandon, or expose children to physical or emotional injury.
The case demonstrates law enforcement’s recognition that children caught in criminal acts may themselves be victims requiring protection rather than punishment—an important distinction in ensuring appropriate responses that prioritize child welfare while holding actual perpetrators accountable.
As investigations continue, the incident serves as a reminder of the vulnerability of children under the control of abusive or criminally-involved caregivers, and the critical importance of systems that can identify and respond to signs of child exploitation even when initially appearing as juvenile delinquency.
