PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has overturned a High Court decision acquitting a 54-year-old man of murdering his father on grounds of unsoundness of mind.
A three-judge panel led by Justice Datuk Azman Abdullah ruled that the High Court erred when acquitting Phang Kar Foong without first requiring him to enter his defence.
“The order of acquittal is set aside, and the case is remitted back to the Ipoh High Court for the respondent to enter his defence before the same judge,“ he said.
The court further ordered that Phang be remanded in a suitable facility pending the continuation of the trial.
The appellate court panel also included Justices Datuk Azmi Ariffin and Datuk Noorin Badaruddin.
Phang is accused of murdering Pang Ket Tai, 75, at a house on Jalan Besar, Kampung Baru Gunung Rapat in Ipoh, Perak.
The alleged offence occurred between 10:30 am and 6:30 pm on September 12, 2020.
According to a psychiatric report, Phang was diagnosed with bipolar disorder with psychotic features.
The report noted that while warded, he inflicted injuries on his own eyes and underwent eye surgery.
As a result of those injuries, his vision has been impaired in both eyes.
On September 30 last year, the High Court acquitted Phang without ordering him to enter his defence on the murder charge.
The court subsequently ordered him to be detained at Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta at the discretion of the Sultan of Perak.
During the appeal, lawyer Gurbachan Singh representing Phang defended the High Court’s decision.
He maintained that the prosecution had established both medical and legal insanity through the psychiatric report.
Deputy public prosecutor Solehah Noratikah Ismail submitted that the High Court’s decision was premature.
She said the decision was inconsistent with legal principles regarding the defence of insanity under Section 84 of the Penal Code.
She said the High Court had wrongly relied on a Court of Appeal ruling that was later overturned by the Federal Court.
The Federal Court held that acquitting the accused before the defence is called amounted to a serious error of law. – Bernama
