Sushila Rani a/p Ramasamy v Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors

Court of Appeal · · Tort Law

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This digest provides AI-generated summaries of recent Malaysian legal judgments and is provided for general informational purposes only. The digest may contain errors, omissions, or inaccuracies, and does not constitute legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. For complete and authoritative information, always consult a qualified legal professional and refer to official court sources (here) or the full text of original judgments. The providers of this digest accept no responsibility or liability for any loss and/or damage resulting from reliance on its contents.

Sushila Rani a/p Ramasamy v Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors
CourtCourt of Appeal
Judgment Date24 September 2025
Date Uploaded6 January 2026
Legal TopicsTort Law
Parties

Appellant(s): Sushila Rani A/P Ramasamy

Respondent(s):

  • Kerajaan Malaysia
  • Menteri Dalam Negeri Malaysia
  • Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Penjara Kluang
Bench
  • YA Datuk Ravinthran a/l Paramaguru
  • Dato' Dr. Choo Kah Sing
  • YA Dato' Ahmad Kamal Bin Md. Shahid
Facts & Background
  • The deceased, an inmate serving a 10-year sentence, was placed in an isolated cell after being found in possession of illicit drugs within the prison.
  • Two days into his isolation, the deceased was discovered hanging by his trousers from the window grill of his cell and was subsequently pronounced dead at the hospital.
  • The appellant, the grandmother of the deceased, initiated a dependency claim against the respondents alleging that the prison authorities were negligent in failing to prevent the deceased from committing suicide.
Issues for the Court
  • Whether the respondents breached their duty of care by failing to prevent the suicide, specifically regarding whether the risk of the deceased taking his own life was foreseeable.
  • Whether the existence of a "sealed packet" containing a knife for emergency use (per standard operating procedure) constituted evidence that the prison authority foresaw a specific risk of suicide.
  • Whether the findings of a Coroner’s Inquest, which concluded that the death was caused by "persons unknown," are binding on the High Court in a subsequent civil action for negligence.
Decision
  • The Court held that there is no general obligation to treat every prisoner as a suicide risk; a breach of duty only arises if a specific risk is apparent and known to the authorities based on the inmate's history.
  • The Court found no breach of duty as the deceased had no recorded history of self-harm while in custody, and the general provision of emergency knives in sealed packets does not establish a specific foreseeable risk for a particular inmate.
  • The Court affirmed that the findings of an Inquest are not binding on a civil Court, as the Court is required to make its own independent findings based on evidence and testimonies tested through cross-examination during trial.
Link to JudgmentView Full Judgment

Related judgments

📬 Found this useful?

Get daily AI-generated summaries of Malaysian legal judgments from the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal straight to your inbox, free!