The provisions for an Inquest in Malaysia are found in

S.328 to 341A of the CPC.

An Inquest is held to investigate the cause(s) of death

especially in cases of sudden deaths (s.329) and deaths in
custody (s.334).

S.328 define cause of death

The inquiry of death is not a criminal trial.

There is no complainant / an A to be prosecuted.

There is no one to conduct the defence.

There is no conviction or punishment imposed on any

person at the end of the inquiry.
There are only ‘interested parties’ such as:
• the next of kin or personal representative of the deceased
person;
• a representative of an enforcement authority or
government department appointed to attend to attend the
inquiry;
•any other person who, in the opinion of the M, is properly
an interested person.
An Inquest is conducted by a Coroner (who is also a
Magistrate) as per S.337 CPC.

The M’s duty is to decide as to the cause of death at the

conclusion of the inquiry.

There is no judgment passed by the M – just a verdict

M shall not frame a verdict that appear to determine any
question of:
• criminal liability on the part of a named person; or
• civil liability of any party.

 Such question on criminal liability should be left in the

hands of the AG who is also the PP, and matters of civil
liability must be left for a claim in damages in a civil court.
 Depend on manner of death

(i) S.329
(a) a person has committed suicide;
(b) a person has been killed by another, or by an animal, or
by machinery, or by an accident;
(c) a person has died under circumstances raising a
reasonable suspicion that some other person has
committed an offence;
(d) the body of a dead person has been found, and it is not
known how he came by his death; or
(e) that a person has died a sudden death.
(ii) S.334

 Any person dies while in

(i) the custody of the police
(ii) a psychiatric hospital
(iii) a prison
(1) Police to investigate
S.329

(i) Officer in charge (OC) of a police station received

information of death to inform OC of Police District

(ii) OC of PD investigate & prepare report of the apparent

cause of death

(iii) Forward the report to M

(2) Police to arrange for Post-mortem examination

S.330
 If suspected that the deceased came by his death in
(i) a sudden; or (ii) unnatural manner; or (iii)by violence or
(iv) his death resulted in any way from or was accelerated
by any unlawful act or omission on the part of any other
person

 IO must inform the nearest Gov Medical Officer (MO)

& shall take/send the body to the nearest Government
hospital for the holding of a post-mortem examination.
GMO

 S.331(1): GMO shall make a post-mortem examination

of the body of the deceased.

 S.331(2): GMO, if it is necessary in order to ascertain

the cause of death,
- shall extend the examination to the dissection of the
body and an analysis of any portion of it, and
- may cause any portion of it to be transmitted to the
Institute for Medical Research.
 S.332(1): GMO shall
(i) draw up a post-mortem report:
- the appearance of the body; and
- the conclusions which he draws from it

(ii) certify as to the cause of death

(iii) date and sign the report

(iv) transmit the report to the OC of the Police District

(the officer shall attach it to the report forwarded under s.
329(5). (Investigation report by IO))
(3) Duty of M on receipt of report (IO Report + Post
mortem Report)

S.333(1)
 If M satisfied as to the cause of death without holding
an inquiry - M shall
(i) report to the PP the cause of death as ascertained to
his satisfaction + his reasons for being so satisfied; and
(ii) transmit to the PP all reports (IO Report + Post
mortem Report) & docs in his possession connected with
the matter.
S.333(2)
 If M unsatisfied as to the cause of death - the M shall
proceed as soon as may be to hold an inquiry

S.333(3)
 It shall not be necessary for the M to hold any inquiry or
to make any report under s.333 (1)
- if any criminal proceedings have been instituted vs any
person in respect of any act connected with the death of
the deceased/such hurt as caused the death.
(1) Officer in charge to give intimation

S.334

(i) When any person dies while in the custody of the police
/ in a psychiatric hospital / prison

(ii)The officer who had the custody of that person or was

in charge - shall immediately give intimation of such death
to the nearest M
(2) The M

(i) in the case of a death in the custody of the police, shall

hold an inquiry into the cause of death

(ii) in other cases, may hold an inquiry into the cause of

death.
S. 339 (1)

 PP may direct a M to hold an inquiry into the cause of,

and the circumstances connected with, any death such
as is referred to in s.329 & 334

 M to whom such direction is given shall then proceed

to hold an inquiry and shall record his finding as to the
cause of death and also as to any of the circumstances
connected with it with regard to which the Public
Prosecutor may have directed him to make inquiry.
 S.335
(1) M have all the powers which he would have in holding
an inquiry into an offence.

(2) M if he considers it expedient that the body of the

deceased person should be examined by a Medical
Officer in order to discover the cause of death may,
whether a post-mortem examination has been made
under s.331 or not, issue his order to a MO to make a
post-mortem examination of the body, and may for that
purpose order the body to be exhumed.
S.336
 It shall not be necessary for a M holding an inquiry to
view the body of the deceased
 but the M may if he considers it expedient view the
body, and may for that purpose cause the body to be
exhumed.
S.338

(2) The place in which any inquiry of death is held

shall be a place open to the public.

 But a M may on special grounds of - public

policy/expediency,
 in his discretion, exclude the public or any person or
persons in particular at any stage of the inquiry
from the place in which the inquiry is being held.
S.337: M holding an inquiry shall inquire
(i) When the deceased came by his death
(ii) Where the deceased came by his death
(iii) How the deceased came by his death
(iv) After what manner the deceased came by his death
(v) Whether any person is criminally concerned in the
cause of the death.

 The inquiry should as far as possible be conducted

continuously until conclusion with minimal of
postponements in between.
Re Anthony Chang Kim Fook, Deceased [2007] 2 CLJ 362

S.337 serves as the terms of reference within which the

Coroner conducts the inquest into the death of the
deceased. As such the Coroner cannot act outside the
perimeter of the said terms of reference.
 In holding the inquiry, the M is usually assisted by the
Prosecuting Officer who is there only to assist the court
in the examination of witnesses.

 A counsel representing an interested party may be

present in the inquiry proceedings.

 The counsel’s role is not to defend anyone but to look

into the interest, i.e. to hold a watching brief, of those
who engage him i.e. usually the next of kin of the
deceased person.
 The counsel does not have the right to speak as of right
but only when allowed to do so by the M.

 The M shall have the control of proceedings and it is

the M that shall first examine the witnesses.

 The M then exercises his discretion to determine who

are the ‘interested persons’ who shall have the right to
examine the witnesses.
 The rules of procedure and rules of evidence that is
applicable in a criminal trial are not applicable in an
inquiry of death.

 The M does not have to strictly follow rules but may

admit even hearsay evidence if he feels that such
evidence may assist him in the inquiry of death.
Re Loh Kah Leong, Deceased [1990] 2 MLJ 126

... It is the primary duty of the learned M conducting the

inquiry to satisfy himself that there is sufficient evidence
in whatever form or manner elicited and whether
admissible or not, which could assist him in establishing
the cause of death of the deceased, he is perfectly
entitled to know and take cognizance of it.
 The M should not entertain any form of objection from
counsel holding watching brief and other interested persons
on the credibility of the witnesses.

 However, witnesses at inquiries of death do take oath and

affirm that they will tell the truth.

 In giving evidence no witness at an inquiry shall be obliged

to answer any question which may incriminate him.

 Where such questions are asked the M shall inform the

witness that he/she may refuse to answer.
 Burden of Proof

Briginshaw v. Briginshaw [1938] 60 CLR 336, Latham CJ:

There is no mathematical scale according to which degree of
certainty of intellectual conviction can be computed or valued. But
there are differences in degree of certainty, which are real, and
which can be intelligently stated, although it is impossible to draw
precise lines, as upon a diagram, and to assign each case to a
particular subdivision of certainty. No court should act upon mere
suspicion, surmise or guesswork in any case. In a civil case, fair
inference may justify a finding upon the basis of preponderance of
probability. The standard of proof required by a cautious and
responsible tribunal will naturally vary in accordance with the
seriousness or importance of the issue.
Inquest Into The Death Of Liam Richard Vidler
Cumming, Micheal Barnes, State Coroner at Brisbane,
Australia :

A coroner should apply the civil standard of proof, namely

the balance of probabilities, but the approach referred to
as the Briginshaw sliding scale is applicable. This means
that the more significant the issue to be determined, the
more serious an allegation or the more inherently unlikely
an occurrence, the clearer and more persuasive the
evidence needed for the trier of fact to be sufficiently
satisfied that it has been proven to the civil standard.
 After hearing the evidence of witnesses regarding the
circumstances surrounding the death and considering
all the documents produced during the inquiry, M may
conclude that the death was due to amongst other
things:
(i) an accident caused by the deceased’s own fault;
(ii) by events beyond human control; or
(iii) due to the actions of known or unknown person/s.

 A suicide verdict may be recorded where the M is

satisfied that the deceased intended to and did take
his/her own life.
 The Magistrate may deliver an open verdict, which
means that the cause of or the circumstances of the
death is unknown or not clear.
Evidence & Finding

S.338(1)

 M shall
(i) record the evidence & his finding.
(ii) immediately transmit to the PP
- the original of such evidence & finding duly
authenticated by his signature; or
- a copy of such evidence and finding certified under his
hand as correct.
 Shanmugam & 5 Ors [2002] 1 LNS 160, Hakim Suriyadi
memutuskan:

To reiterate, when conducting an inquiry a magistrate must confine

himself to the evidence and arrive at a specific verdict based only
on the established facts pursuant to s. 337 of the CPC. Probablities
and guesswork can never be the basis for that specific verdict.

 Re Inquest Into The Death Of Sujatha Krishnan, Deceased

[2009] 5 CLJ 783:
... As far as the standard of proof in an inquest is concerned, I am of
the view that the test is on the balance of probabilities sliding to
the beyond reasonable doubt.
 Under s.341A, the verdict delivered by the M at the
conclusion of an inquiry is subject to revision by the HC.
 Power of the PP

S.41.
 Where an inquiry of death has been closed and the PP
considers further investigation is necessary
 he may direct the M to reopen the inquiry & conduct
further investigation and proceed as though the
inquiry has not been closed.