BALIK PULAU: An assemblyman's wife took the witness stand and told a Magistrates' Court here to drop the case of her husband voluntarily causing hurt against her.
Nur Hidayah Abd Jabar, 35, told the court on the first day of trial that she had no intention of pursuing the case and wished for no further action against her husband, Pantai Jerejak assemblyman Fahmi Zainol, as it was a misunderstanding between the couple that led to the incident.
During the examination by Deputy Public Prosecutor Ikmal Affendi Zulkifly, Nur Hidayah said while she filed a police report against her husband on the morning of Feb 23, this year (2026) for causing an injury to her eye, she filed another report to withdraw it on the same day (Feb 23).
Wanting the case dismissed, Nur Hidayah further told the court that her husband did not intend to physically injure her.
"He did not have an intention to hurt me, it was a misunderstanding.
"I withdrew the report on the same day at 8pm (Feb 23) stating it was a misunderstanding between us that led to the scuffle.
"I said I did not want to proceed with the case.
"He did not mean to hurt me, there was a fight between us which resulted in me getting hurt," she said before Magistrate Chia Huey Ting on Thursday (Aug 20).
She then told the court that she lodged a third police report stating her dissatisfaction that the police went ahead to charge Fahmi even though she had lodged a report to withdraw her initial complaint.
After she told the court that she hoped the case would be dismissed, Ikmal then applied for another hearing date pending an application for further instructions from the Attorney General’s Chambers.
Defence counsel Shamsher Singh Thind objected and hoped the court would either dismiss the case or acquit his client.
He argued that the case no longer had any basis to proceed in light of the complainant’s testimony.
“The wife lodged a police report to withdraw the complaint and later lodged another report because she was dissatisfied with the incident.
"The complainant’s testimony today shows that a struggle occurred between the couple.
“She (the wife) has said that the accused did not intend to injure her and had acted in self-defence," he told the court.
He then cited several court decisions concerning legal principles related to the prosecution’s failure to present available evidence and circumstances in which a charge could be considered groundless.
Ikmal said the facts of the cases cited by the defence differed from the present case as the prosecution had only called its first witness, the complainant, to testify during the first day of proceedings.
He said the complainant’s withdrawal of her police report did not automatically remove the prosecution’s authority to continue with the case, as the decision to prosecute did not depend solely on the victim’s wishes.
Chia said the prosecution was entitled to seek further instructions from the Attorney General’s Chambers on the direction of the case, as it was only the first day of the trial.
She then said that while the complainant had withdrawn her report, it was not a groundless charge.
"There were injuries (based on the photographic evidence provided).
"The matter is about proceeding with the case or not, and it is about upholding justice, not just the victim's choice," she said.
Chia then allowed the prosecution’s application to seek further instructions.
She set Sept 10 for the trial to resume, ordering all required witnesses to attend if the prosecution proceeded with the case.
On Feb 27 (2026), Fahmi, 35, pleaded not guilty to voluntarily causing hurt to his wife.
The former Penang Agrotechnology, Food Security and Cooperatives Development Committee chairman was charged with committing the offence against Nur Hidayah at Persiaran Pantai Jerejak, Bayan Lepas, at about 10pm on Feb 22 this year (2026).
The charge was framed under Section 323 of the Penal Code, read with Section 326A of the same Code, which provides for a maximum prison sentence of two years, or a fine of up to RM2,000, or both, upon conviction.
