SHAH ALAM: The High Court here has set March 4 to deliver its decision on the notice of motion filed by Zayn Rayyan's parents to strike out a child neglect charge, allegedly by placing their son at risk of physical harm.
Judge Roszianayati Ahmad fixed the date after hearing submissions from both the defence and the prosecution regarding the validity of the charge.
Defence counsel Marcus Lee, representing Zayn's parents Zaim Ikhwan Zahari and Ismanira Abdul Manaf, contended that the charge under Section 31(1) of the Child Act 2001 was flawed and did not meet requirements under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).
"Our primary complaint is that the charge is defective. The charge states that my clients neglected their child in a manner likely to cause physical injury.
"However, under Section 31(1) of the Child Act 2001, the emphasis is on whether the alleged neglect was committed and whether it was likely to have caused physical injury," he argued at the High Court here on Tuesday (Feb 25).
Lee argued that the manner in which the crime was committed must be clearly specified in the charge to establish the actus reus (guilty act).
"Without specifying the manner of neglect, it will be difficult for the trial judge to assess whether the alleged neglect was likely to cause physical injury or not.
"Is there a possibility that neglect occurred but did not necessarily lead to harm? That is why the manner of the alleged act must be made clear," he explained.
He also drew a comparison between the case at hand and murder charges, stating that while murder cases do not always specify the method of killing, neglect cases under Section 31 require a subjective assessment of whether the neglect was likely to cause harm.
"The wording 'in a manner likely to cause harm' in the charge is merely a repetition of the provision in the law, but the specific act of neglect is missing," Lee argued, adding that this omission hinders his clients' ability to mount a proper defence.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Raja Zaizul Faridah Raja Zaharudin countered the defence's arguments, maintaining that the charge against the accused is not defective and complies with the legal provisions under Sections 152 and 153 of the CPC.
"The issue raised by the defence concerns an allegedly defective charge, which they claim is unclear.
"However, under Section 31(1)(a) of the Child Act 2001, the prosecution only needs to prove three key elements which are firstly, the victim is a child under 18 years old.
"Secondly, the accused had custody of the victim and lastly, the accused neglected the child, resulting in physical or emotional injury," she explained.
She further said that the charge mirrors the exact language of the law, including the word "likely", which is explicitly stated in the statute.
"The purpose of framing a charge is to inform the accused of the offence and allow them to prepare a defence.
"In this case, the trial in the Sessions Court is already underway, and the prosecution has called 20 witnesses, with at least 10 more expected to testify in March.
"Many of these witnesses have already been cross-examined by the defence team," she added.
Raja Zaizul questioned the defence's claim that the charge was vague, arguing that if it were truly unclear, the defence would not have been able to effectively cross-examine prosecution witnesses.
In December 2023, six-year-old autistic child Zayn Rayyan Abdul Matin was reported missing in Damansara Damai, Selangor.
His body was discovered the following day in a nearby stream, with autopsy results indicating injuries consistent with self-defence.
In June 2024, his parents Zaim Ikhwan Zahari and Ismanira Abdul Manaf were charged with neglect likely to cause physical harm under Section 31(1)(a) of the Child Act 2001. They pleaded not guilty.
On Jan 21, Zayn's parents filed a notice of motion at the Shah Alam High Court seeking the dismissal of the charges against them, along with an immediate discharge and acquittal, contending that the charges failed to disclose any offence under Section 31 of the Child Act 2001.
On Feb 3, the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court dismissed the defence's preliminary objection, which alleged that the charge against the couple was defective.
The trial is ongoing as of February 2025, with the next session scheduled for March 11.
