High Court upholds 10-year jail, 8 strokes for hotel room gang robbery

SIBU: The High Court here on today (Nov. 4) dismissed an appeal by a 29-year-old man, cementing a 10-year prison sentence and eight strokes of whipping for his role in a violent, late-night hotel room gang robbery.

Delivering his decision in open court, Judicial Commissioner Alvin Leong Yin Yuan ruled that the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court was appropriate and fell well within established judicial benchmarks, rejecting arguments that the punishment was manifestly excessive.

The case dated back to the night of February 12, 2021, at approximately 10:15 pm.

The appellant, Vincent Engan Galun, alongside three co-accused individuals – Wat Rantai, Aishah Humaira Abdullah and Liong Sin – conjointly targeted a lone victim, Kendawang Lepang, inside a hotel room along Jalan Sentral.

According to submission by Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP), Mark Kenneth Netto, the offenders entered the room successively, culminating with the appellant.

During the confrontation, the victim was subjected to severe psychological terror; one of the accomplices brandished an object perceived to be sharp, while the appellant aggressively demanded money.

Overwhelmed by fear, the victim surrendered RM350 in cash before discovering that his Oppo mobile phone had also been stolen.

The appellant and his co-accused originally claimed trial before the late Sessions Court Judge Marutin Pagan.

However, midway through the proceedings, the appellant chose to abscond, forcing the court to revoke his bail and continue the trial in his absence pursuant to Section 425A of the Criminal Procedure Code.

He was subsequently re-arrested on May 30, 2025 – two months after the trial judge had passed away without recording formal written grounds of judgment.

Despite the missing sentencing notes, the Sessions Court convicted the group of gang robbery under Section 395 of the Penal Code, sentencing the male offenders to 10 years’ imprisonment and eight strokes of whipping each (with female co-accused Aishah Humaira exempted from whipping by law).

Seeking a lighter sentence, the appellant – represented by counsel, Terrence Tiong, via the National Legal Aid Foundation (YBGK) – argued that the whipping component was disproportionate.

Defence counsel attempted to draw parallels to ordinary single-offender robbery cases under Sections 392 and 394 of the Penal Code, where whipping totals often range between two to four strokes, while emphasising that no physical injuries were inflicted and that the stolen cash amounted to a modest RM350.

However, Mark fiercely contested the appeal, and submitted that the appellant’s cited authorities were fundamentally misconceived because they failed to distinguish pure gang robbery under Section 395, which inherently commands harsher deterrence.

The prosecution highlighted landmark precedents – including Frankie Chaong Lagi v PP and Ahmad Rashidi Zainol & Anor v PP – which establish that gang robbery convictions following a contested trial routinely attract heavy penalties, ranging up to 12 years’ imprisonment and 10 strokes of whipping.

Furthermore, the prosecution argued that the appellant could not claim mitigation credit or leniency as a first-time offender or youthful offender, given that he was 23 at the time of the crime, lacked verifiable proof of a clean record, and had actively frustrated the administration of justice by fleeing mid-trial.

The High Court concurred with the prosecution’s stance, underscoring that gang robbery is a grave societal threat whose severity is measured not merely by the nominal value of stolen property or the absence of physical wounds, but by the collective terror inflicted upon victims.

Finding no error in principle or excessive severity, the court officially dismissed the appeal and upheld the Sessions Court’s original sentence of 10 years behind bars paired with eight strokes of the rod.