Mohomad Rauf Mohomad Hilmi alias Gama vs. The Attorney General – CA HCC/0231/2018-2023

In the case between Mohomad Rauf Mohomad Hilmi alias Gama (Accused-Appellant) and the Attorney General (Respondent), the court addressed the issue of whether a conviction for murder, grounded solely on the belated testimony of a single eyewitness and in the context of significant investigative lapses, could be regarded as legally sound and just. The court held that such a conviction cannot be considered safe, given the delays in recording eyewitness statements and inconsistent investigative procedures, and ultimately set aside the conviction and sentence, acquitting the appellant. This decision reaffirmed that the accused is entitled to a fair trial, with the prosecution bearing the burden of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt, especially in cases with serious procedural shortcomings. R