Court restores conviction, RM7,000 fine against tow truck driver

2026-02-27 - 07:43

The Court of Appeal ruled that the High Court should have strictly followed the provisions of the law. PUTRAJAYA: A tow truck driver was fined RM7,000, in default three months’ jail, after the Court of Appeal reinstated his conviction for careless and inconsiderate driving in a 2019 crash. A three-member bench chaired by Justice Azmi Ariffin said the High Court in Johor Bahru had erred in exercising revisionary powers under Section 323(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) to acquit Liaw Zhi Foh based on records from a civil proceeding. “In our view, the High Court cannot rely on proceedings in the sessions court to reverse the conviction and sentence,” he said in allowing the prosecution’s appeal. Azmi, who sat with Justices Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz and Meor Hashimi Abdul Hamid, said the High Court should have strictly followed the provisions of the law. Section 323 of the CPC only empowers the High Court to call for and examine records of subordinate criminal courts to verify the legality, propriety and correctness of a finding, sentence or order. Liaw was convicted in January 2022 after he pleaded guilty before a magistrate. Following an appeal, the High Court set aside his conviction in April 2024 after the investigating officer admitted to discrepancies in the charge during a subsequent negligence suit. A tow truck driven by Liaw was involved in an accident with a motorcycle ridden by S Shanmuganathan at the Tuas Second Link, which connects Singapore and Johor, at about 9pm on March 13, 2019. The accident was said to have occurred at Km1.4 of the stretch, while the charge sheet stated that it took place at Km0.4. Beyond jurisdiction Deputy public prosecutor Ahmad Fairuz Johari submitted that the High Court could only examine the magistrates’ court record as provided for under Section 323(1) of the CPC. He said the charge was read and explained to Liaw by a Mandarin interpreter, and procedures laid out under Section 173(b) of the CPC were followed. “The High Court cannot conduct a revision based on a letter but should have confined itself to the magistrate’s court record,” he said. Liaw’s lawyer, JS Naicker, said the revision was filed as the guilty plea to the offence under Section 43(1) of the Road Transport Act 1987 was based on a mistake arising from discrepancies in the charge sheet. “This was discovered when the investigating officer gave evidence in the sessions court,” he said, adding that Liaw was unrepresented when he pleaded guilty. The bench gave Liaw until March 6 to settle the fine.