Court discharges Sugu’s assault case after wife Pavithra withdraws complaint

Estimate Reading Time: 2 minutes

IPOH: The Sessions Court here has given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) to YouTube sensation S. Pavithra’s husband, M. Sugu, for allegedly assaulting her.

-Advertisement-

Judge Norashima Khalid made the decision after listening to arguments from both the prosecution and Sugu’s counsel.

Early this month, Pavithra submitted a letter to the prosecution to not to proceed with the case as she had decided to withdraw the charge made against her husband.

Before the decision was made, Pavithra took an oath in the witness dock before Norashima, and said that she was willingly withdrawing the case, when the Deputy Public Prosecutor Liyana Zawani Mohd Radzi asked if she was forced or threatened to do so.

On a question by Sugu’s lawyer Syahrul Nizam on whether she (Pavithra) agreed that she would not be taking further action against the case, she replied yes.

“Thus I am requesting that my client be acquitted and discharged, since the wife has taken oath that she would not be taking further action over the case,” he said.

-Advertisement-

However, Liyana requested for a DNAA instead, as she said the prosecution had the power to reopen the case if required in the future.

Sugu, 29, a former estate worker, is alleged to have assaulted Pavithra, 28, using a mobile phone and a sickle which caused injuries to her lips, left cheek and right arm at the parking lot of Hospital Raja Permaisuri Bainun between 4pm and 6pm on July 21.

Sugu was also charged with carrying a sickle at about 6pm at the same place and date, and the offence, under Section 6 (1) of the Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons Act 1958, provides for imprisonment for up to 10 years, if found guilty.

On the charge of carrying a sickle, Syahrul said he had submitted a letter of representation to the prosecution to examine and review the charge.

He told the court that the application had been submitted as he felt that there were defence merits that must be considered by the prosecution.

Liyana requested for another date, as she said that the prosecution needed time to go through the application.

Norashima then set Oct 22 to hear the first representation. -The Star

Share this Article
  • 1
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
    1
    Share