P/S : I am sharing my personal notes of law-related subjects. Some parts of them are explained in a very informal-relaxed way and mix of languages (BM and English). Secondly, as law revolves every day, there will be outdated parts in my notes. Two ways of handling it.. (1) double check with the latest law and keep it to yourself (2) same with No. 1 coupled with your generosity to share with us, the LinkedIn users (hiks ^_^). Till then, have a nice day!

1. 1
Section 7
(Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect of FIS1)
I. ACTUAL PROVISION
BM Fakta-fakta yang menjadi hal kejadian, sebab atau kesan, sama ada langsung
atau selainnya, bagi fakta relevan atau fakta isu, atau yang menjadi keadaan
benda dalam mana fakta itu berlaku atau, yang memberi peluang untuk fakta
itu berlaku atau dilakukan, adalah relevan.
BI Facts which are the occasion, cause or effect, immediate or otherwise, of
relevant facts or facts in issue, or which constitute the state of things under
which they happened or which afforded an opportunity of their occurrence or
transaction, are relevant.
A. ILLUSTRATION A
The question is whether A robbed B.
- The facts that shortly before the robbery B went to a fair with money in his
possession and that he showed or mentioned the fact that he had it to third
persons are relevant.
B. ILLUSTRATION B2
The question is whether A murdered B.
 Marks on the ground produced by a struggle at or near the place where the
murder was committed are relevant facts.
C. ILLUSTRATION C
The question is whether A poisoned B
 The state of B’s health before the symptoms ascribed to poison and habits
of B known to A, which afforded an opportunity for the administration of
poison, are relevant facts.
1 Facts in issue
2 Remember : dr rama kata illustration B bukan untuk describe occasion ya kawan2 

2. 2
II. 5 RELEVANT FACTS UNDER SEC 7
A. FACTS WHICH ARE THE OCCASION
1. Boleh guna illustration (a) by the virtue of the words “went to a fair
with money” – phrase ni refer pada kejadian2 yg berlaku sblm the commission
of the crime
2. Cases
Jainnand v R.
(1949)
Facts  the deceased and his family stayed with the accused at his
house for the purpose of getting treatment for his wife.
 The victim’s wife handed over her ornaments (stuff) to the
accused for safe custody.
 The accused took all the money to allegedly purchase a truck
but never purchased any such truck.
 This led to a quarrel between the accused and the deceased.
 The deceased then left the house of the accused with all his
belongings.
 The deceased continued visiting the accused to demand the
return of his money.
 The accused promised to return it on a particular date.
 On that particular day, the deceased went to the accused’s
house where he killed him.
Held The fact of the accused has taken money and ornaments from the
deceased and the deceased on the day of murder had gone to the
accused to demand them are relevant showing occasion cause or

3. 3
effect of the fact in issue.
Kok Ho Leng
v
PP
(kaitan s.6 &
7)
Issue whether a telephone message to the premises during the raid was
admissible in evidence.
Held it is admissible under two sections: 6 which is the section which
deals with what are known as "res gestae" in England. I think that
a telephone message has some analogy to the shouting of the by-
standers; further in view of the subsequent cutting of the wire I
think that the telephone message may be relevant under s 7.”
PP v Toh Kee
Huat (kaitan
s.7 & 9)
Facts a car has been stolen but was found the next day. Fingerprints
was found on the inner surface of the glass on the driver's door
and was proved to be those of the respondents..
Held  The position of the fingerprints shows that the mark could not
have been made there except after someone (if not himself)
had unlawfully tampered with the locked car to gain entry.
 Although fingerprints are more relevant under section 9 due to
identification, but in this case, the position of the fingerprints
itself are relevant under section 7 to show the occasion, cause
of effect of the car-theft
R v.
Richardson,
Facts  Richardson was charged with the murder of the pregnant
girl at a cottage.
 She was found dead with her throat cut.
Held  there was evidence of the footsteps of a person who had
been running away from the place of the incident.
 This shows the effect subsequent to the event.
 At the time of the incident, the girl was in the cottage and
was found dead with her throat cut.
 The fact that she was alone showed the occasion of
relevant fact.
 There was a witness, a girl, who saw a person who looked
like the accused running towards the cottage before the
incident occurred.
 There was the fact affording the opportunity to commit
the crime, where the fellow of the servant of the accused

4. 4
said that the accused was away from work for about an
hour.
 The state of things that the girl was pregnant also
constituted a relevant fact to show that the accused had
knowledge about the matter and as to the motive of the
murder, in order to conceal the evidence, he murdered the
deceased.
B. FACTS WHICH CONSTITUTE CAUSE
1. Pakai kes Jainnand
2. Please be noted that cause of death identified by the experts is relevant
under Section 7 as part of facts which constitute cause, in contrast
a) Opinion of expert is relevant under s. 45
b) DNA is relevant under Section 9
3. Contoh Dr Rama: Fakta tertuduh ditangkap ialah memandu secara
berbahaya. Fakta yang relevan untuk tunjuk sebab jenayah tu berlaku ialah
tertuduh masbuk semasa memandu
4. Dalam pada yang sama, fakta yang menunjukkan sebab tak semestinya
perlu bersekali dengan kesan sbb tu it was codified as “cause or effect”,
example:
Tuduhan Cubaan membunuh
Sebab Mabuk
Kesan Takde kesan sebab maybe mangsa tak mati pun,
cubaan gagal so x de kesan.

5. 5
5. Contoh kes: Saw Thein Teck v R
Held: evidence indicating the accused was drunk could be admitted under
section 7 as it could be a causation of dangerous driving which the accused
was charged under.
C. FACTS WHICH CONSTITUTE EFFECT
1. Effect means everything that leaves behind a certain result which not
only records the happening of the act but also clarifies the nature of the act.
2. Use Illustration (b)
3. Contoh obvious : fingerprints, marks, footsteps, etc, at the place where
the crime was committed or the injuries of the accused caused by the struggle
or while being under the influence of intoxication.
4. Refer R v Richardson
5. Kow Liang Tiang v. PP [2011]
Facts  The appellant was alleged to have murdered his wife and the cause of death was
due to:
(i) "soft tissue injuries" and
(ii) "multiple stab and penetrating wounds". (caused by scissors)
Held  When the appellant was arrested on the next day, his right hand palm was injured
(EFFECT).This fact is to be seen in the light of facts that the alleged murder
weapon, in the form of a pair of scissors, had a broken handle and that the blade
was bent. The scissors must have been used with such force that the end of the
blade was bent, and that in the course of which, it must have caused the injuries
to the right hand palm. (CAUSE & STATE OF THINGS)
 Besides recovering the blood-stained scissors the police also recovered a T-shirt
and shorts with traces of blood stains in a pail in the house, there is evidence to
show that the T-shirt and shorts are those of the appellant.(EFFECT) The

6. 6
chemist later confirmed that the blood stains on the scissors, T-shirt and shorts is
that of type "B", which was the blood type of the deceased. The doctor who
conducted the post-mortem confirmed that the scissors (P8A) could have caused
the multiple and penetrating wounds found on the deceased.3
 All these evidence show cause or effect to fact in issue, that is the murder of the
deceased in this case. These relevant facts are admissible under section 7 to link
appellant to the murder
6. Facts that constitutes effect is not necessarily relating to facts in issue,
it can be relevant facts per se
a) Example: tape recording is relevant under 3 provisions
(1) Res gastae, s.6
(2) Effect, s.7
(3) Identity, s. 9
b) This example is supported by the case Yusuffali Esmail v. State
of Maharashta [1968] AIR 147
Held if the conversation between the accused and the complainant at the time of offering
and taking the bribe has been tape recorded and the voice has been identified, then
the tape-recorded conversation may be relevant under section 7 as forming the effect
of relevant facts.
D. FACTS WHICH CONSTITUTE THE STATE OF THINGS UNDER WHICH THEY
HAPPENED
1. Usually, it encompasses the physical condition connected with the
main fact which happened.
3 Kes ni boleh guna untuk seksyen 9 (identity) jugak

7. 7
2. Contoh mudah : the state of health, relationship between the parties
involved or habits of the person, keadaan rumah usang adalah relevan untuk
buktikan pemohon/ plaintiff/ mana2 pihak tak pernah duduk situ
3. Refer kes Kow Liang Tiang v. PP [2011] at Part II, C, 5 and
Richardson’s case at Part II,A, 2
E. FACTS WHICH AFFORDED AN OPPORTUNITY OF THEIR OCCURRENCE OR
TRANSACTION
1. Opportunity is anything which would not have happened but for that cause
2. Use Illustration (c)
3. Principles from Aziz Bin Muhamad DIN v PP [1996]4
Facts  Rape case, accused is alleged to rape complainant at the witness’s house.
 From the evidence adduced, it is clear that witness allowed the accused to spend
the night in his house.
 witness saw the complainant there on that night and the following morning
Issue  Whether statement from complainant is sufficient to corroborate the
complainant’s testimony that the accused raped her at the witness’s house
Held
 Although it constitutes evidence of opportunity but it is settled law that mere
opportunity is insufficient, must be exclusive opportunity to be a relevant
corroboration fact.
 The evidence of opportunity should be supplemented by proof of circumstances of
such a nature 'to lead to the inference that it was probable that advantage would be
taken of the opportunity
 For this case, medical evidence which corroborates the evidence of complainant
would have constituted such supplementary evidence
4 Yg ni saya refer buku Augustine Paul

8. 8
4. This part of section 7 is also associated to the defence of alibi (read
with section 402A CPC), in which the accused shows that he has no
opportunity to commit the crime.
a) IOW, apa2 yang tak memberikan peluang macam defence of
alibi shall not be relavant under this section.
b) This issue can be seen in the case of Sidik Sumar v. Emperor5
Facts  the accused struck the victim twice with a sharp hatchet (cut) due to a long dispute
between them over a woman.
 The prosecution relied on the evidence of footprints.
 The accused used the defence of alibi to show that he had no opportunity to kill
the victim. He claimed that at the time the event happened, he was at one place to
which he goes daily to sell milk and only returned in the evening.
Held  evidence of footprints at or near the scene of the offence was relevant under
section 7 to show the facts constituting the effects of facts in issue.
 3 witnesses heard noises of abuse before the accused struck the victim, showing
the opportunity which the accused and co-accused had in waiting for their victim.
5. Also refer case R v Richardson at Part II, A, 2
6. Chan Chwen Kong v Public Prosecutor [1962] 1 MLJ 307
“It must, however, be borne in mind that in cases like this where the evidence
is wholly circumstantial what has to be considered is not only the strength of
each individual strand of evidence but also the combined strength of these
strands when twisted together to make a rope. The real question is: is that rope
strong enough to hang the prisoner?”
5 [1942] AIR SIND 1126

9. 9
III. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN S.7 AND S.9
A. THEY ARE CLOSELY CONNECTED BECAUSE
1. whatever evidence found which are occasion, cause or effect to
relevant facts or fact in issue may be relevant facts under section 9 for
identification.
2. Example: fingerprints and blood-type.
3. However, section 7 is relevant to link the evidence found to fact in
issue.
a) For example, in PP v Toh Kee Huat, there were other
fingerprints found as well but the position of respondent's fingerprint
inside the glass on the driver's door show that it could not be there
unless there's unlawful tampering to break in the car, thus link the
evidence to fact in issue, that is the car theft in that case.
b) In Kow Liang Tiang v PP, the evidence found are relevant facts
under section 7 to link it with the deceased's death caused by multiple
stabs and penetrating wound caused by scissors. The fact that
appellant's blood stains was found on the scissors, clothes and also
injury on his right palm showed the cause to the murder.
4. This is in consistent with the court's decision in Chan Chwen Kong v.
PP [1962]
" ... what has to be considered is not only the strength of each individual strand
of evidence but also the combined strength of these strands when twisted
together to make a rope. The real question is: is that rope strong enough to
hang the prisoner?"