KUALA SELANGOR, June 11 — The Sessions Court has fixed July 11 for the re-mention of the case involving a married couple suspected of supplying firearms to an Israeli man.
The two accused, Sharifah Faraha Syed Husin, 41, and Abdul Azim Mohd Yasin, 43, arrived in court at 9.30am and 9.50am respectively.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Fazeedah Faik said the prosecution is still preparing some documents to be submitted to the defence.
She added that a representation from the defence on behalf of Sharifah Faraha had been received on June 2, and that it is being examined for further action.
At the proceedings, counsel Mohamad Isa Mohamad Basir, representing Sharifah Faraha, also submitted two applications for his client to be allowed to be examined at a clinic outside the prison and to request the warden not to provide false information related to the case.
"... two weeks ago, my client passed out in the Kajang women's prison, and I understand that until today, she only received normal treatment, and my client complained of pain in the head and requested to get an x-ray to check the head.
"I also understand that the wardens have given various false information and have put pressure on my client, and this act needs to stop," he said.
Isa's team is also in the process of obtaining the health records of the accused at the Sultanah Aminah Hospital in Johor, as she had previously suffered from depression and anxiety.
Judge Ahmad Faizadh Yahya then advised both applications to be resolved administratively by the prison.
Lawyer Ethan Tan, who represented Abdul Azim, was also present at today's proceedings.
On April 8, Sharifah Faraha pleaded not guilty to the charge of possessing a CZ 75 P-01 CAL.9 LUGER pistol at a house in Kampung Bukit Belimbing, Kuala Selangor at 8 pm, March 29.
The woman was charged under Section 8 of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, which carries a maximum prison sentence of 14 years and no less than six strokes of the cane if convicted.
Abdul Azim was alleged to be with Sharifah in a situation that gave rise to a reasonable presumption that he knew his wife had the firearm in question at the same location, date and time.
The charge was made under Section 9 of the Firearms (Increased Penalties) Act 1971, which provides similar penalties if convicted.
— Bernama
