CRIMINAL LAW: Penal Code - Section 302 - Murder - Circumstantial evidence - Defence of alibi - Station diary tendered to show first respondent was not at scene of crime - Failure to call maker to establish truth of contents - Whether defence mere denial - Whether call logs and records from Smart Tag device showed that respondents were present at scene of crime - Information leading to discovery - Location of scene of crime - Whether remains of deceased found - Whether respondents intimidated - Possession of deceased's jewellery - Whether presumption under s. 114(a) Evidence Act 1950 invoked - Whether common intention established

CRIMINAL LAW: Penal Code - Section 34 - Common intention - Murder - Whether there is requirement to prove who actually caused death of deceased - Whether respondents acted together to formulate crime - Whether common intention established

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Defence - Alibi - Murder - Entry in station diary tendered to show first respondent not at scene of crime - Failure to call maker to establish truth of contents - Whether defence mere denial

EVIDENCE: Adverse inference - Failure to call witness - Whether material witness - Whether amounted to suppression of evidence - Whether respondents deprived of opportunity to cross-examine witness - Whether evidence of witness contributed to respondents' defence - Whether caused unfairness to respondents - Whether s. 114(g) Evidence Act 1950 applicable

EVIDENCE: Information leading to fact discovered - Information leading to discovery - Whether information derived from respondents separately - Location of scene of crime - Whether remains of deceased discovered - Whether police had prior knowledge of location - Whether respondents intimidated - PP v. Krishna Rao Gurumurthi & Ors - Evidence Act 1950, s. 27

EVIDENCE: Information leading to fact discovered - Information given by accused - Deceased's jewellery found in second respondent's jacket - Whether information led to discovery of jewellery - Whether information proved - Evidence Act 1950, s. 27

UNDANG-UNDANG JENAYAH: Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - Seksyen 6 & 39A(1) - Memiliki 21.31g kanabis - Sama ada dibuktikan - Sama ada anggapan di bawah s. 37(d) digunapakai - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan tentang kewujudan dadah - Sama ada satu kes prima facie dibuktikan - Rahmani Ali Mohamad v. PP

PROSEDUR JENAYAH: Pendakwaan - Kes prima facie - Memiliki 21.31 gram kanabis - Keterangan - Penilaian maksimum - Sama ada anggapan di bawah s. 37(d) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 digunapakai - Sama ada tertuduh mempunyai pengetahuan tentang kewujudan dadah - Sama ada satu kes prima facie dibuktikan - Kanun Tatacara Jenayah, s. 173(h)(iii)