PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has overturned a High Court ruling that required an investigating officer to be physically present during remand proceedings for suspects under investigation.
A three-member bench comprising Justices Datuk Azman Abdullah, Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan and Datuk Noorin Badaruddin allowed the prosecution’s appeal by ruling that an investigating officer’s presence was not mandated under the law.
Justice Mohamed Zaini Mazlan stated that Section 117 of the Criminal Procedure Code does not explicitly require the investigating officer to personally attend and present the remand application.
He explained that the investigating officer’s statutory duty involves transmitting relevant police diary entries to the Magistrate and ensuring the suspect appears before the court.
Justice Mohamed Zaini further clarified that the absence of the investigating officer during remand proceedings does not jeopardise the suspect’s liberty or constitutional rights.
The requirement for suspects to be presented before Magistrates alongside submitted diary entries and written remand reasons collectively serves as a check against power abuse.
Magistrates do not merely act as rubber stamps and base decisions on investigation adequacy rather than the investigating officer’s physical presence.
Investigating officers often handle numerous cases simultaneously and may be unavailable due to court witness duties, official training, or unforeseen circumstances.
Given the constitutional requirement to bring suspects before Magistrates within 24 hours of arrest, insisting on only the assigned investigating officer would be impractical.
A rigid interpretation of Section 117 would impair police operational efficiency and ultimately hinder the investigative process.
The case originated when two suspects were brought for remand proceedings on May 6 this year with a sergeant major appearing instead of the investigating officer.
The Magistrate allowed the police application to remand both suspects for two days despite the investigating officer’s absence.
The suspects subsequently applied for revision at the High Court, which ruled the remand illegal due to the investigating officer’s absence.
High Court Judge Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin had set aside the Magistrate’s remand order by interpreting Section 117 as specifically requiring the investigating officer.
Both suspects, aged 41 and 31, were being investigated under the Poisons Act 1952 and Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 before being charged in court.
Deputy Public Prosecutors Datuk Seri Saiful Edris Zainuddin, Zaki Asyraf Zubir and Zander Lim Wai Keong represented the prosecution during proceedings.
Lawyer Collin Arvind Andrew appeared for the two suspects throughout the legal proceedings. – Bernama