JUDGMENT
Introduction
[1] This application raises an important question of law, and that is, whether the widow of a deceased appellant, whose appeal against conviction and sentence of imprisonment for two offences under s 165 of the Penal Code, pending disposal in this court at the time of his death, was entitled to substitute the appellant as his personal representative and continue to prosecute the appeal.
Background Facts
[2] The appellant was convicted of two charges under s 165 of the Penal Code, and was imposed concurrent sentences of four months'imprisonment for each offence by the Sessions Court at Shah Alam.
[3] The High Court at Shah Alam dismissed the appellant's appeal, and affirmed the conviction and sentence. The appellant then appealed against both conviction and sentence to the Court of Appeal pursuant to s 50 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964; and had obtained a stay of execution of the sentence. Whilst awaiting the hearing of the appeal, the appellant passed away.
[4] The appellant's widow, Madam S Ponnamah a/p Sinnappan, vide Notice of Motion (encl 15) applied for orders:
(i) that she be appointed the personal representative of the appellant; and
(ii) for the appeal to be continued in the name of Madam S Ponnamah a/p Sinnappan, as the personal representative of the deceased appellant.
[5] In support of the application, the applicant, Madam S Ponnamah a/p Sinnappan, states that she has legal standing and interest to prosecute the appeal on grounds that:
(i) the appellant was a public servant, ie a school principal on the pensionable scheme of service;
(ii) ordinarily as the appellant's widow, upon the appellant's death she would stand to draw the Government pension that the appellant was entitled to; and