Larenddran a/l Subramaniam v Pendakwa Raya

Applicant(s): Larenddran A/L Subramaniam

Respondent(s): Pendakwa Raya

• YA Dato' Paduka Azman Bin Abdullah
• YA Datuk Hayatul Akmal binti Abdul Aziz
• YA Datuk Meor Hashimi bin Abdul Hamid

• The applicant, who was a child (17 years old) at the time of the offence, was charged and convicted at the High Court for murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code read with Section 34, and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment and 7 strokes of the rotan under Section 91(1)(g) of the Child Act 2001.
• The Court of Appeal had earlier dismissed his appeal against conviction and sentence on 5 February 2025.
• The applicant, acting in person, filed a motion invoking the Court's revisionary powers to review the earlier Court of Appeal decision, on the basis that his status as a child at the time of the offence entitled him to protections under the Child Act 2001.

• Whether the Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to exercise its revisionary powers to correct an illegal sentence in a prior appellate decision.
• Whether the sentence of whipping imposed under Section 91(1)(g) of the Child Act 2001 was lawful, given that this provision (and the mode of whipping under Section 92) had been repealed by the Child (Amendment) Act 2016 with effect from 1 January 2017.
• Whether the 20-year imprisonment term imposed as an alternative to the death penalty was lawful, given that Section 302 of the Penal Code (as amended) prescribes imprisonment of between 30 and 40 years, and whether Section 97 of the Child Act 2001 (governing offenders who were children at the time of the offence, facing offences punishable by death) applied instead.

• The Court held that it possessed jurisdiction to review and correct legal errors in prior proceedings, and allowed the applicant's revision application, with the prosecution conceding to the application.
• The Court found that the whipping sentence was unlawful as Section 91(1)(g) and Section 92 of the Child Act 2001 had been repealed before the applicant's conviction and sentencing, and that the 20-year imprisonment term was similarly unlawful as it did not accord with either the amended Section 302 of the Penal Code or Section 97 of the Child Act 2001.
• The Court set aside the High Court's conviction and sentence dated 14 December 2023, and ordered instead that the applicant be detained during the pleasure of the Sultan of Selangor pursuant to Section 97(2)(b) of the Child Act 2001, with his case to be reviewed annually under Section 97(4).