03.

2 Arrest LAW 4310 Criminal Procedure 1 1

- Suffian LP: referred to s.15 CPC and Shaaban

• Section 15 of Criminal Procedure Code- - Held :
Arrest, how made i. It was not obvious that the constable wanted to
• Section 15(1) arrest.[failure to state in term] The statement
• Arrest can happen by :- given by Koperal Ghani does not constitute an
1. Actual Touching arrest.
2. Confining the body unless ii. No force use to restrain nor
3. Submitting to the custody by word or action iii. Made clear by words or conduct that he would
(surrender) use force if necessary.
- Criticism: There was an arrest because the liberty of
Shaaban v. Chong Fook Kam & Anor [1969] 2 MLJ 219 these people were restrained. Looking at the
• Art 5 of the Federal Constitution - Privy Council decision circumstances surrounding the case, there had been
“No person shall be deprived of his personal liberty save - Lord Devlin: “An arrest occurs when a police officer attacks and 4 murders had been committed, thus it
in accordance with the law.” states in terms that he is arresting or when he uses would be rational not to move when you are told so by
• Arrest must be in accordance with law, otherwise the force to restrain the individual person. It occurs also the police.
suspected person will be deprived his personal liberty when by words or conduct, he makes it clear that he
will, if necessary, use force to prevent the individual Opinion of some Judges
• Importance of determining an arrest. from going where he may want to go. It does not occur • Arrest can be divided into two :-
Former Section 113 of Criminal Procedure Code/Sect when he stops an individual to make enquiries. 1. Actual arrest
37A(1)(b)DDA - Arrest can happen in 3 situations: 2. Constructive arrest- when liberty is restrained [Conduct
• Any statement made after arrest can be used against the 1. Arrest happens when the arrestor states in term. E.g: /words]
arrested person, provided that the police officer who “Stop, you are under arrest”.
arrests him gave him a cautioned statement 2. Use of force. • Actual Arrest
3. He did not use force but it’s clear from his words or PP v. Johari bin Abdul Kadir [1987] 2 CLJ 66
• What is Arrest? action that he will use force to prevent the person Held : It was arrest because if the man tries to escape
Inwoods [1973] 2 AER 645 from going away. from the bus, the police would have stopped him.
- Whether a person is under arrest or not depends on all
the circumstances of the case. • Observation on Shaaban • PP v. Tan Seow Chuan
- Law places an obligation to make it plain to the suspect • Failure to refer to s.15 CPC when putting up the 3 Held: Showing the police badge amounts to arrest.
that he is no longer a free man - (duty to inform) propositions:
- Proposition a and c inconsistence with s15 CPC • PP v. Roseyatimah bte Neza & Anor [1989] 1 MLJ 360
R v Brosch [1988] Crim. L.R 743 - Facts: The first accused was asked to whom the dry
- Arrest is constituted by the physical touching or • Jayaraman & Ors v PP [1982] 2 MLJ 306 FC leaves (suspected to be cannabis) belonged, to which
seizure of the suspect’s body with a view to his - Facts : she replied that they belonged to her boyfriend, the
detention.” - A series of attacks had happened at a Hindu temple. second accused.
- Intention to arrest is the essential element to One night, 2 men reported to the police that 8 men - Held (Peh Swee Chin J): The reply was inadmissible as
constitute an arrest. attacked the temple. They managed to detain some arrest had been taken place and the accused was not
men. and when the police arrived, one Corp. Ghani administered caution pursuant to section 37A of the
• Inwoo told the 8 appellants “not to leave the place” Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.
• ds and Brosch - Later ASP Jamaluddin came and these men were - There was arrest as she was in the state of being
• To constitute a lawful arrest, the arrested person must at questioned. They gave very incriminating oral replies to watched or guarded. Had she tried to run away, she
the time of the arrest or as soon as practicable after the the questions. would have been stopped.
arrest be informed that he is under arrest and the ground - Issue : Was there an arrest before the questionings by - A person was under arrest if ‘from circumstances it can
of his arrest. ASP Jamaluddin when one Koperal Ghani told them be implied that personal liberty has been restrained”
“Don’t go anywhere”.
03.2 Arrest LAW 4310 Criminal Procedure 1 2

- His Lordship had endorsed the constructive arrest i. Seizable offence: police officer may arrest without • Test: objective test as laid down by House of Lords in
concept in this case. warrant. Tims v John Lewis [1951] 2 KB 459.
ii. Non-seizable offence: arrest with warrant. • Followed in Tan Kay Teck & Anor v PP [1957] MLJ 237
• PP v. Salleh bin Saad [1983] 2 MLJ 164 iii. Offences against law other than Penal Code, the last • Whyatt CJ: “The question whether a complaint was
Held: It was constructive arrest when the accused part of first schedule. reasonable or not is one which objectively the court has
answered “That belongs to me” when the police found to decide on the evidence before it…The court must first
something incriminating in his house and asked him who • Seizable: offence under the Penal Code: ascertain what facts were known to the arresting officer
owns it. punishable with imprisonment of 3 years and above. Eg: and then decide whether these facts amounted to a
Theft under s.379PC reasonable complaint that a person to be arrested was
• PP v. Lim Kin Ann [1988] 1 MLJ 401 concerned in the commission of a seizable offence.”
Held: This was constructive arrest when the accused said • Non seizable: may not arrest without warrant • Facts :
“the briefcase belongs to me” when the police found Offence under the PC which are punishable with • In this case, an ASP Jones had arrested without warrant
cannabis in a briefcase. imprisonment less than 3 years. Mr Tan and his wife at night, saying that he received a
reasonable complaint that Mr Tan had committed an
• PP v. Tan Chye Joo & Anor [1989] 2 MLJ 253 • Offence outside the Penal Code: offence under Section 347 of Penal Code.
Held: This was a constructive arrest when the police If imprisonment is less than 3 years or a fine: arrest shall • Issue: Was the complaint reasonable?
found cannabis in a biscuit tin after a search. be with warrant UNLESS any written law provides • Mr Tan was a contractor. The person who lodged the
otherwise complaint was Ng Yow Jik, a sub-contractor of Mr Tan.
• In PP v. Kang Ho Soh [1991] 3 CLJ 2914, Mahadev • Mr Tan was supposed to pay Mr Ng but he never did. Mr
Shanker J had said that “I have not found the distinction • Section 23 (1) (a) of CPC : Ng went to Mr Tan’s house and he was brought to a small
between actual and constructive arrest helpful”. • Any police officer or penghulu may without a warrant room where there were two other men and the
• Whether a person was under actual arrest at a given arrest any person who has been concerned in any offence contractor’s wife who then locked the door of the room.
moment of time is a question of fact, to be decided committed anywhere in Malaysia which is seizable A discussion ensued whereby Ng was asked by Tan if he
according to the circumstances of each case. offence under any law in force in that part of Malaysia in had received the money with the other persons around
which it was committed or against whom a reasonable him in a menacing manner. Tan was alleged to have
• This judgment was followed by Suriyadi J in PP v. Shee complaint has been made or credible information has banged the table in asking Ng to speak up when he said
Chin Wah [1998] 5 MLJ 429 been received or a reasonable suspicion exists of his he had yet received the money. Ng had lodged the report
having so concerned. because he feared that the discussion about the debt was
• Writer, Prof Mimi Kamariah also opined that there is no • that where any seizable offence has been committed secretly taped and it might jeopardized his chances of
difference between actual and constructive arrest. As anywhere in Malaysia, any police officer or penghulu may winning a civil suit.
long as there is arrest, caution is needed. arrest without warrant any person concerned in any such • Held: The arrest made was unlawful because the
offence:- complaint was unreasonable. The report made by Ng did
• Court of Appeal: It all depends on the circumstances of a. against whom a reasonable complaint has been made not disclose an offence of confining a person for the
any particular case, whether in fact, it has been showed b. against whom a credible information has been received purpose of extorting property under Section 347 of Penal
that a man has been arrested. The court considers it c. against whom a reasonable suspicious exists Code but his main concern was with the civil law.
unwise to say that there should be any particular formula
to be followed. No formula will suit every case and it may • Ramly & Ors v. Jaafar –
well be, that different procedures might have to be • “It was not possible to lay down any abstract rule to
followed with different persons depending on certain determine what is reasonable suspicion and complaint
variables such as age, ethnic origin, knowledge of English, but depends, by large on facts and circumstances of each
intellectual quality and physical/ mental abilities. In other particular case. In any event, it must be founded on some Credible information
words, there is no magical formula. Only the obligation to tangible legal evidence within the cognizance of the • Means information that is reliable or can be believed.
make it clear to the suspect by what he said and done police officer to justify a reasonable person in concluding • Bare assertion without anything more cannot amount to
that he is no longer a free man. that the suspect is guilty of a seizable crime.” credible information.
• Types of Arrest- Section 2 of Criminal Procedure Code
03.2 Arrest LAW 4310 Criminal Procedure 1 3

• Hashim bin Daud v. Yahya bin Hashim & Anor [1977] 1 • In re-arresting such person, the police officer has to hole and tries to enter the room. He cannot see the thief,
MLJ 259 examine whether the offence is seizable or non seizable but on hearing the sound, he becomes aware of the fact
- Facts: There have been information given to the police and then re-arrest according to s.23 or s.24 CPC that a thief is breaking the wall.
that the accused were involved in electricity generator • Although he cannot see the thief, he can arrest him. It
and cement mixture theft. ARREST BY PRIVATE PERSON would be absurd to hold otherwise. Again supposed a
- Held: The information must be credible before arrest • Section 27 of CPC provides private person may arrest : blind woman was sleeping, and a thief wants to forcibly
can be made. In this case, it was credible because the i. Any person in his view , commits a non bailable and remove an ornament from her person. Although she
informant was credible and in the past, he had given seizable offence or who has been proclaimed under cannot see him, it is reasonable for her to arrest him”
credible information. Section 44 CPC (person who has absconded) • The act of running and act of robbery itself constitutes a
ii. Must without unnecessary delay hand over such series of action. Since he had seen the man running, he
• Saul Hamid bin Pakir Mohamad v. Inspector Abdul Fatah person so arrested to the nearest police had seen an act which constitutes the action of robbery-
bin Abdul Rahman & Anor [1999] 6 MLJ 800 officer/station. Harish Chandra J, in Sheo Balak Dusandh.
- Issue: Whether the police had the authority to arrest
the plaintiff. • How to arrest by private person?
• Facts: The plaintiff was a technician attached to the • Elements of S.27 CPC
Penang Botanical Gardens while the defendant was a • Section 27- “in his view” has 2 interpretations:
police officer who had received information that he i) in his sight Without unnecessary delay
plaintiff had been concerned with ii) in his opinion • Once a private person effects an arrest without warrant,
• In his sight he will have to make over the person to the police officer
• Eng Hoe v. AG [1933] MLJ 151 • Strict interpretation was held by Durga Singh [1963] 1 Gr or police station without unnecessary delay.
• Whether there is a reasonable suspicion on a particular LJ 827 and Kartar Singh [1956] AIR Punj 122 • Tims v John Lewis & Co Ltd [1952] 1 All ER 1203
case depends on the facts and for the Court to decide - in his presence • Held : The fact that the mother and daughter were made
• The applicant fitted the description of an offender. - followed in Metro (Golden Mile) Pte Ltd v Paul Chua to wait for nearly an hour until the chief store detective
• Facts : Wah Lian (unreported) : article in [1981] 23 MLJ 182 and managing director of the shop were sent for and
• After investigation, Mr Tan was found not to be the heard the account to obtain their authority to prosecute
criminal. He was arrested because he looked physically Malaysia position: Liberal interpretation before they were taken to the police station was held not
similar to the perpetrator. He sued for alleged wrongful • PP v. Sam Hong Choy [1996] 1 CLJ 514 to constitute an ‘unreasonable delay’, the law being that
arrest. • Facts: PW 9, the key witness of the prosecution said that an arrested person should be taken by the private person
• Held: Any reasonable person who saw Mr Tan would upon entering into the building, he heard gun shots and before a Justice of Peace or a police officer as soon as was
think that he is the perpetrator. There were facts which woman screaming “Tolong kejar perompak”. Upon reasonably possible and not necessary forthwith.
creates a reasonable suspicion in the mind of a hearing the shout, 2 men ran past him with plastic bag
reasonable man and the circumstances were such that and a gun. He chased them and managed to grab one Arrest with warrant
any reasonable person acting without passion or guy. The other escapes in a taxi. • Section 30 – Justice of Peace and Magistrate can arrest
prejudice would have fairly suspected the petitioner of • Issue: Was the arrest lawful because alleged offence not within the local limits
being the person who did it. The arrest was reasonable. done in his view? • Section 31- Arrest by Magistrate
• Held: The court referred to 2 Indian cases ie Nazir v. Rex • The warrant must sign and sealed. It can be executed
• Section 25 of CPC and Sheo Balak Dusadh v. PP. anywhere in Malaysia. If a warrant is to be executed in
• What Penghulu has to do after arrest Sabah or Sarawak, it must be endorsed first by Magistrate
• A person arrested by Penghulu without warrant shall • In Nazir’s case, the word “in his view” was given liberal in Sabah/ Sarawak.
without unnecessary delay hand over the person so approach by Bird Basni Prasad. He said: “in his view” • This is by virtue of Summonses and Warrants (Special
arrested to the nearest police officer or in the absence of must be given liberal interpretation. They meant not only Provisions) Act 1965.
police officer, take such person to the nearest police his sight, but also in his presence. A narrow interpretation • It can also be enforced in Singapore and Brunei, but must
station and the police will re arrest every person so of these words will greatly defeat the object of this also be endorsed by Magistrate.
arrested. section. “Supposed in a winter, a person was sleeping • Once a warrant is issued, it will be not enforceable if:-
inside his room and there’s no light in it. A thief makes a 1. It is cancelled by the court which issued it
03.2 Arrest LAW 4310 Criminal Procedure 1 4

2. It has been executed and the person was arrested. from the use of handcuffs on unconvicted person
• Any police can arrest. If they want to arrest, they must unless essential.
specifically state the name of the person they want to
arrest in the warrant. • These 2 judgments are reflected in the Chief Justice
• When issuing a warrant, the court may make in its Circular dated 24 February 1987.
endorsement or footnote of the warrant if the person is • The principle was adopted in Ramanathan s/o Chelliah v.
willing to produce a bond or surety for his attendance in PP [1996] 2 MLJ 538
court at a specified time. The officer to whom the - Shaik Daud JCA: In the final analysis, it is in the sole
warrant is directed, shall take such security and release discretion of the presiding officer to consider whether
such person from custody. it is essential to have the accused person handcuffed
be it during the entire trial or at the arrangement if
and when the application is made by the prosecution.
- Needless to say, such discretion must be exercised
Rights relating to arrest judiciously and not merely because the prosecution
1. Rights To Use Force ( For both arrestor and arrestee) wants it to be…In the present appeal involving Mr
• Section 15(3) of CPC - Cannot cause death of a person Ramanathan, we could not find anywhere that an
who is not accused of an offence punishable with application was made by the learned DPP nor we could
death or with imprisonment for life. find any credible material put before the court. We are
• Section 19(1) – not subject to more restraint than unanimously of the view that based on the alleged
necessary to prevent escape charges faced by the appellant, it can be hardly
• Issue of using handcuffs, because “no man in guilty justified for him to be handcuffed…It is therefore,
until proven guilty”. timely to remind lower courts to bear these
• Should we handcuff? observations in mind when exercising their discretion
• Yaakub bin Ahmad v. PP [1975] 2 MLJ 223 in such situations.
Gill CJ : As an accused person is presumed innocent
until he is proved guilty, it is not the normal practice to • See Kah Loon v. PP [1881] SSLR 101
put any restrain on him when he appear before a court - The police was trying to effect an arrest with warrant.
to be tried for a criminal offence. Some sort of restrain, He had accidentally left the warrant at the police
however may become necessary while the accused is station.
violent or has committed a crime of violence or may - Held: If there is an unlawful arrest, The arrestee can
have attempted to escape. In the present case, the use force to prevent it.
learned DPP had applied the permission from the court
to handcuff the accused during the trial as he had • PP v. Kok Khee [1963] MLJ 362
made several attempts to escape. Offences:
1) Hawking vegetables without license.
• PP v. Wee Swee Siang [1948] MLJ 114 2) Using criminal force on a police constable in the
Callow J : The complaint by Mr. Salt that the accused execution of his duty.
was brought to the court below in manacles. An - Police did not give grounds for arrest. Confiscated the
accused person is innocent until he is proven guilty dacing and accused assaulted the officer by hitting the
and restraint is not usually required unless the accused dacing on the police constable.
is violent or has committed a crime of violence or that - Can he use force when arrested?
he may attempt to escape. As to whether violence or - Ong J : The offender was justified in putting up a
escape was anticipated in this case, I do not know. I struggle since he was resisting an illegal arrest or
hope those responsible for the custody of the accused unjustifiable use of force towards him.
persons will bear this observation in mind and refrain
03.2 Arrest LAW 4310 Criminal Procedure 1 5

2. Detention for 24 hours powers by any and every activity just so that our reason which is not a true reason. In other
• Art 5(4) FC. The person arrested shall without nation continues to be respected for justice and words,a citizen is entitled to know on what charge
unreasonable delay be produced before a Magistrate fairplay. or on suspicion of what crime he is being seized.
within 24 hrs. ii. If the citizen is not so informed but is nevertheless
• Section 28 of CPC- How a person is to be dealt with seized, the policeman is liable for false
and detention for more than 24 hours. imprisonment.
• Section 54(1)(b) of Interpretation Act: iii. The requirement that the person should be
- computation of 24 hours • PDRM v. Keong Mei Cheng Audrey [1997] 3 MLJ 477; see informed of the reason why he is seized naturally
- if last day of the period includes excluded day, the also Keong Mei Cheng Audrey v PDRM [1994] 3 MLJ 296 does not exist if the circumstances are such that
period shall be included the following day which is - Shaik Daud CJA: he must know the general nature of the alleged
not included. - Section 119 is mandatory. Investigation diaries must offence for which he is detained.
• it’s not applicable for holidays within 6 days be given to court. Apart from the issue of the legality iv. This right does not mean that technical or precise
of the arrest, we think that the counsel for the language need to be used. The matter is a matter
Shaaban & Anor v. PP Respondent is on a firmer ground when he raises the of substance and turns on the elementary
- The period of detention was 24 hours & 35 minutes. issue as provision of section 119 of CPC had been proposition that a person is prima facie entitled to
- Held: The journey was long because it was made in complied with. Section 119 provides that the police his freedom if he knows in substance the reason
Bukit Tinggi. officer making the investigation shall forthwith submit why these restraints should be imposed.
to the magistrate a copy of investigation diary v. The arrestee cannot complain that he has not
Section 117 of Criminal Procedure Code: Remand Order hereinafter prescribed relating to the case and shall at been supplied with the above information as and
• When investigation cannot be completed within 24 hrs. the same time produce the accused to the Magistrate. when he should be if he himself produces the
1. When any person is arrested and detained in custody. Section 119 makes it mandatory for the police officer situation which makes it practically impossible to
2. Investigations cannot be completed within 24 hours. seeking to detention of person to produce a copy of inform him.
3. The are grounds to show that the accusation was such diary, failing which the Magistrate ought not to
well-founded. entertain the application. • Limitation:
4. Police has to transmit an investigation diary to the - there is no need to inform if the nature of the crime is
Magistrate. • Re Detention of Leonard Teoh Hooi Leong obvious.
[1998] 1 MLJ 757 - cannot demand the information in precise and
• Section 119- diary of proceedings in investigation - In this case, investigation diary was produced, plus a technical language.
• The diaries are very crucial, the magistrate must have a letter from the investigating officer with reasons why - if you yourself makes it hard for you to know, you can’t
copy to scrutinize the development of the police they should detain the accused. The diary contained claim that you have not been informed.
investigations. contemporaneous detail on what the police had done
so far. • Malaysian case adopted this principle in Abdul Rahman v.
Re The Detention of Sivarasa & Ors [1996] 3 MLJ 611 - Held: The magistrate was right when issuing remand. Tan Jo Koh [1968] 1 MLJ 205
- diary showed the movement of the accused not the • “Neither arrest nor detention can properly be carried out
progress of the investigations. 3. Right to Be Informed on the Grounds of Arrest: s.28A (1) without the accused person being told the offence for
- Syed Ahmad Aidid J : As a matter of law, not only must CPC which he is arrested.”
a diary be in the forms specified by section 119 of the
CPC but it must also be replete with grounds indicating Christie & Anor v. Leachinsky [1947] 1 All ER 567 4. Right To Have a Lawyer
that the information against the accused is well - Viscount Simon: He proposes 5 propositions:- - Right to have access to counsel
founded. It is incumbent to the police to report the PP i. If a policeman arrests without warrant on - Right to legal representation
on investigation. Anything short of that again shall not reasonable suspicion of felony or of other crime of
be acceptable as otherwise the police will be on frolic a sort which does not require a warrant, he must • Right 1- Not yet represented, just consulting a lawyer.
of their own and citizens and subjects can be in grave in ordinary circumstances informed the person • Article 5(3) of Federal Constitution- right to be
danger of losing their liberty if not their limb. The court arrested on the true grounds of arrest. He is not consulted and defended by legal practitioner of his
must always be vigilant to guard against the abuse of entitled to keep the reason for himself or to give a choice.
03.2 Arrest LAW 4310 Criminal Procedure 1 6

• e.g. Detention of certified Drug Dependants to undergo • Produced before a magistrate for authorisation for
compulsory treatment and rehabilitation in treatment further detention – Re Detention Sivarasa, section 28 &
• Right 2 - representation during remand proceedings and rehabilitation centres. Detention of persons in 117, 119 CPC. Investigation diary to be adduced b4
Ooi Ah Phua v. Officer In charge of Criminal Investigation detention centres who entered the country illegally magistrate.
[1975] 2 MLJ 198 pending their deportation to their country of origin.
- Suffian LP: The right to have a lawyer is there once he • Habeas corpus is quasi criminal since it is commenced • Not more than 7 or 14 in police custody as the case may
is arrested. However, the right is not immediately with a writ supported by affidavit in accordance with the be: Ramli Bin Salleh – the full period shld not be given as
available. Therefore, balance has to be made between civil procedures. a matter of course but shld weigh the seriousness of the
the rights of arrested person to have a lawyer and the • Rajoo s/o Ramasamy v IGP [1990] 2 MLJ 87, the detainee offence and whether a shorter period wld suffice.
duty of the police officer to ensure that the public is made his representation to YDPA on 22nd May 1988 but
protected. the Advisory Board’s recommendation to His Majesty was
8 months later i.e. 27th March 1989 and not within 3 • Dato Khairuddin (Husband to Umi Aida) 7 days remand
Saul Hamid v. PP [1987] 2 MLJ 736 months as required by the Emergency (Public order and under 123 Penal Code. Toppling the govt.?
- Edgar Joseph J : Arrested person has right to be prevention of crime) Ordinance 1969. The extension to • Dato Khairuddin on release, he was rearrested under
represented by a practitioner during remand submit the recommendation to YDPA should have been SOSMA (a specific legislation that allow detention up to
proceeding before a Magistrate under section 117. procured from YDPA within the three months not on 28th 30 days). CPC is a general legislation (7 or 14 days only
- The police can discharge the onus of satisfying the February 1989 which was after the expiry date. Detention under CPC)
Magistrate that to allow him to exercise that right was held to be ultra vires the Federal Constitution. • (lock up – see Lock up Rules);
would allow result in undue interference with the • At the end of the detention period, to be either released
course of investigation (with or without police bail+bond like loan and mortgage,
scholarship & bond – see section 29 CPC) or be charged
• Right 3 - Can have a lawyer of your choice if the lawyer is (section 173(A) CPC) with or without court bail (section
able and willing. RIGHT OF AN ARRESTED PERSON 387 & 388 CPC);
• Case : Sim Kee Guan v. PP [1988] 2 MLJ 382 • Grounds of arrest – 28 & 28A CPC;
• Aminah v Supt of Prison Pengkalan Che Pa – as soon as
• Right to remedies for wrongful arrest and detention may be means as is reasonable given the circumstances?
- Habeas Corpus • Not to be subjected to more restraints than is necessary – • R v Inwood – no magic formula, only the obligation to
- right to initiate civil action for damages section 19(2) CPC (PP v Tan Sri Rahim Noor) make it plain to the suspect by what is said and done that
• Right to Counsel – section 28A CPC. – Hashim Bin Saud; he is no longer a free man.
Habeas Corpus Ramli Bin Salleh.
• Detention must be illegal. A prisoner duly convicted and • As soon as possible means with all convenient speed not • PP v Rosyatimah – an arrest occurs if the person is being
imprison cannot seek for this remedy, or not because that immediately – balancing public & private rights – Ooi Ah watched or guarded to prevent his escape – Compare this
his right to counsel has been denied or that the condition Phua. to Shaaban (arrest does not occur if the police stop a
of the lock-up or prison is unsatisfactory. person for making inquiries)
• Yeap Hock Seng v Minister of Home Affairs, Malaysia • Right to communicate with counsel or friend - Ooi Ah
- It is a high prerogative writ of summary character for Phua’s case • See also section 17, 111 & 112 CPC (distinguishing arrest
the enforcement of the cherished civil rights of from mere detention/ stop & search)
personal liberty and entitles the subject of detention to • Right to counsel cannot be denied but may be delayed.
a judicial determination that the administrative order • PP v Shee Chin Wah – when did the arrest occurs?
adduced as warrant for the detention is legally valid, in • Read cases such as PP v Kang Ho Soh etc
the sense that it is pursuant to a valid statutory • Right to remain silent – Common Law
authority and to test whether the detention • Not to be detained for more than 24 hours; Computation Arrest (suspicion, complaint & credible information),
proceedings are…….. a mere sham, nothing but an of 24 hours – section 56 Interpretation Act. reasonable force & pursue.
empty form • Case Ooi Ah Phua. Excluded day: Weekly holiday (Friday
or Saturday as the case may be) & Public holiday.
03.2 Arrest LAW 4310 Criminal Procedure 1 7

• Section 23(1)(a) CPC (reasonable suspicion, credible

information & reasonable complaint).

Seizable, non-seizable, bailable and non-bailable.

• Mahmood v Govt of Malaysia
• Abdul Rahman v Tan Jo Koh
• PP v Yong Moi Sin
• Aminurasyid (PP v Jenain & Anor) – the Policemen were
held not guilty for murder.
• Lahad Datu militants – licence to kill (section 15(3) CPC
or relevant laws.
• Pursue & reasonable force (15(2), 15(3), 26 (pursue a
fugitive), 29 (release of person arrested / under lawful
custody)), 32 (escape from lawful custody –recapture )
CPC.