Insurance Agent Sentenced to 14 Years for Sexually Assaulting Son

PUTRAJAYA: An insurance agent was sent to jail to begin serving a 14-year sentence after the Court of Appeal dismissed his appeal against his conviction for physically sexually assaulting his nine-year-old son. A three-member bench led by Justice Datuk Azman Abdullah also upheld the Sessions Court’s decision for the man to be given three strokes of the cane for the offence. In delivering the court’s decision on Wednesday (Jan 21), Justice Azman said the victim had no reason to fabricate allegations against his own father. The court ordered the 43-year-old man to commence his jail term immediately. He had previously been given a stay of execution of his sentence and released on bail of RM15,000 with one surety pending the outcome of the appeal. In upholding the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court, Justice Azman said the sentence was intended to serve as a reminder not only to the appellant, but also to the public at large, to stay away from crime. Also sitting on the bench were Justices Datuk Noorin Badaruddin and Datuk Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid. According to the charge sheet, the man committed the offence against his eldest son at a house in Banting, Selangor, at noon on June 18, 2021. The Sessions Court found him guilty on July 2, 2024, sentencing him to 12 years’ imprisonment and one stroke of the cane. He was also sentenced to two years’ jail and two strokes of the cane under Section 16 (1) of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017, with the sentences ordered to run consecutively. The Sessions Court further ordered the man to undergo counselling while in prison and to be placed under police supervision for two years after serving his time. His appeal was dismissed by the High Court on May 19 last year, prompting a further appeal to the Court of Appeal. At today’s proceedings, the appellant’s counsel, Khairul Naim Rafidi, argued that his client had been denied his right to a fair trial as the Sessions Court judge had excessively intervened in the proceedings, which exceeded the limits set under Section 165 of the Evidence Act 1960. However, Deputy Public Prosecutor P. Sarulatha submitted that there was strong and credible evidence from the victim, who testified that he had been sexually assaulted by his father. – Bernama