Child Murder Case: Former Soldier’s Death Sentence Commuted to 40 Years’ Jail, 12 Strokes

PUTRAJAYA: A former military personnel escaped the gallows after the Federal Court, in a majority decision of 2‑1, commuted the sentence to 40 years’ imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane for killing his biological daughter, eight years ago.

A three‑judge panel comprising Datuk Nordin Hassan, Datuk Seri Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera and Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali upheld the conviction under Section 302 of the Penal Code against Mohammad Abdullah Mohamed, 44.

“The court finds that there was no miscarriage of justice in the earlier court’s decision which convicted the appellant. Therefore, the conviction is upheld under Section 302 of the Penal Code,” said Justice Nordin.

Regarding the sentence, Justice Nordin said there was a split decision in the case where Justices Vazeer Alam and Mohd Nazlan were of the view that the death sentence against the accused should be commuted.

“I however disagree with these two panel judges because for me, this is a case where the death sentence should have been upheld. However, you are fortunate because the majority of the panel in this case agreed to commute the death sentence to a prison sentence.

“They are of the view that the appropriate sentence for this case is 40 years’ imprisonment from the date of arrest (31 January 2018) as well as 12 strokes of the cane,” he said.

On 22 August 2023, the Seremban High Court sentenced Mohammad Abdullah to death after finding him guilty of murdering Nur Aina Nabihah, 9, at a house in Taman Vista Jaya, Lukut, Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan between 8.30 pm and 11.30 pm on 31 January 2018.

The conviction and death sentence were then upheld by the Court of Appeal on 26 June 2025.

Earlier, lawyer Afifuddin Ahmad Hafifi, representing Mohammad Abdullah, said that the conviction under Section 302 was unsafe as the earlier court had admitted the testimony of the 18th prosecution witness (SP18), the deceased’s brother, to convict the appellant without conducting a competency test to determine the witness’s level of competency.

He said that intelligence or intellectual ability in giving reasonable and rational answers is insufficient for the court to admit the witness’s testimony under oath.

“In this case, my client had taken his child (the victim) to the hospital for treatment. I also request that my client be given a second chance,” he said.

However, Deputy Public Prosecutor Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin said that SP18, who was 15 years old at the time of giving testimony, understood the questions asked during the trial.

He said that SP18 in his testimony told that he and the deceased were punished by their father for not praying and that the accused ordered them to do pumping and sit‑ups 500 times.

“When the deceased could no longer do so, the deceased was kicked and stepped on the stomach by the accused, causing her pancreas to rupture. The deceased’s ribs were also fractured and there were strangulation marks on the neck and blows to the head.

“Abuse had occurred in this case and there were 23 external injuries on the deceased’s body… the appellant does not deserve a second chance and the public wants the death sentence to be given in this case,” he said, adding that the appellant had never shown remorse.

When met by reporters after the proceedings, Wan Shaharuddin said that his side accepts the court’s decision.

“I am grateful that the court imposed a 40‑year prison sentence. During the period of serving that sentence, he (the accused) needs to think about what he did to his child. That is worse than the death sentence,” he said.

BERNAMA