The High Court in Shah Alam today set Jan 30 for a decision on an application by a lawyer in cosmetics millionaire Sosilawati murder trial, to use a prosecution witness' police reports during

cross-examination.    

Gurbachan Singh, the counsel for the second accused, T Thilaiyalagan, made the application under Section 145 of the Evidence Act 1950 to cross-examine the prosecution’s 32nd witness, interrogation officer C/Insp N Govindan, by referring to several police reports lodged by the witness in the course of investigations into the case.   

Section 145 governs the cross-examination of a witness in relation to previous written statements.

In his submission before Judge Akhtar Tahir, Gurbachan Singh said the police reports may be used to show inconsistency in the witness’ testimony in court.

“I submit that previous statements include police reports as well,” he said.

Deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Saiful Edris Zainuddin, however, argued that the attempt to use the police reports was to make it a basis to impeach Govindan.     

He said the challenge on the credibility of the witness could not be based on the said police reports.   

Meanwhile, DPP Ishak Mohd Yusoff submitted that there was a difference between first information reports (FIR) and police reports.  

“In most cases, the FIRs can be used under Section 145 but police reports are inadmissible,” he said.  

Akhtar then noted that statements made under Section 112 of the Criminal Procedure Code could not be tendered in court but could only be admissible in impeachment proceedings.

He then asked the question: “So can a police report be used to impeach a witness?”  

To which Gurbachan Singh responded: “We are not seeking to admit the police reports but only to cross-examine the witness.”

On trial are former lawyer N Pathmanabhan and three farm workers, T Thilaiyalagan, R Matan and R Khatavarayan, who are charged with murdering Sosilawati, 47, bank officer Noorhisham Mohamad, 38, lawyer Ahmad Kamil Abdul Karim, 32, and Sosilawati’s driver, Kamaruddin Shamsuddin, 44.   

Pathmanabhan, 43, Thilaiyalagan, 21, Matan, 22, and Kathavarayan, 32, allegedly committed the offence at Lot 2001, Jalan Tanjong Layang, Tanjung Sepat, Banting, between 8.30pm and 9.45pm on Aug 30, 2010.  

They face the mandatory death sentence under Section 302 of the Penal Code, if convicted.  

‘Blood samples linked to murder probe’

Meanwhile, the 91st prosecution witness, emergency medical consultant, Dr Cheah Phee Keng, 35, said on Sept 14 2010 police brought four individuals to the Kuala Lumpur Hospital emergency department to obtain blood samples for DNA comparisons.  

Dr Cheah, who is now attached to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Sabah, said the blood samples were linked to the murder investigation.  

He said three doctors were tasked with drawing the samples from the four individuals who happened to be the victims’ family members.    

The trial, which entered its 60th day today, resumes on Jan 30.

- Bernama