Aminulrasyid's family awarded RM414,800 in damages

Judge Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim ordered the family to be paid damages of RM150,000 for pain and suffering, RM150,000 in aggravated and exemplary damages, RM10,000 for bereavement, RM4,800 for funeral expenses and RM100,000 for public misfeasance.

He also ordered the defendants to pay costs, totalling RM50,000, to the plaintiffs.

In the suit, Aminulrasyid's mother, Norsiah Mohammad, 67, and eldest sister Nor Azura, 46, as the plaintiffs, named Corporal Jenain Subi, Shah Alam District Police Chief, former Selangor police chief Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar (now the Inspector-General of Police), the Inspector-General of Police and the Malaysian government as defendants.

The suit was filed to claim damages of almost RM50 million for Aminulrasyid's death, allegedly caused by gunshot wounds to the head arising from Jenain's negligence.

In his judgment, Ahmad Zaidi said the plaintiffs had succeeded in establishing that it was Jenain who fired the shot at the car that Aminulrasyid was in at Jalan Tarian 11/2, Section 11 here on the morning of April 26, 2010.

"We are aware that policemen are empowered to take crime prevention action and because of that they are supplied weapon. We do not question that, but there are limits to power, how it (weapon) is used.

"So, in this case, the action of the police is bound by the IGPSO (Inspector-General of Police Standing Order) in what condition are they allowed to fire.

"In his evidence, the first defendant (Jenain) said his intention of firing the shot was to stop car (with registration number) BET 5023 (in which Aminulrasyid was in) because of reckless driving. In this case, was it apt for the defendant to fire the shot at Jalan Tarian?.

"In a situation on a quiet road at between 1 and 2 am, in a housing area, when Aminulrasyid was attempting to flee from the police and there was no counter-fire. In this situation, I opine that the first defendant had over-acted, was negligent and in haste, as well as breached the IGPSO when firing the shot," he added.

On the plaintiff's claim against the third defendant (Khalid), Ahmad Zaidi said the court found that his action in calling for a media conference was to cover the mistake done by Jenain.

"The third defendant tried to say that the policeman was justified shoot Aminulrasyid because he (the boy) was linked to crime following the discovery of a machete in the car he was in.

"However, it was not proven how the machete was there. Hence, the plaintiffs had proven there was public misfeasance," he added.

Aminulrasyid's family was represented by lawyers N. Surendran and Latheefa Koya, while lawyer Zulkifly Omar represented Jenain and federal counsel Norhasmanita Abdul Manap represented the other defendants.

In November 2013, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision to acquit Jenain on a charge of causing Aminulrasyid's death when chasing him at Jalan Tarian 11/2, Section 11 here between 1.10 am and 2 am on April 26, 2010.