KUALA LUMPUR (Oct 8): The Federal Court on Tuesday upheld the death sentence imposed on lawyer N Pathmanabhan and farmhand T Thilaiyalagan for the murder of cosmetics millionaire Datuk Sosilawati Lawiya and her three aides.

The three-member bench, led by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, dismissed their review application and unanimously upheld the death sentences of Pathmanabhan, 56, and Thilaiyalagan, 32.

Another appellant, R Kathavarayan, 44, had earlier withdrawn his death sentence review application, resulting in capital punishments for all three for their involvement in what has been called the Banting murders case.

“The court is not reviewing the conviction on the modus operandi of the murder committed,” Tengku Maimun said. “The appeal is dismissed and the application of the death sentence is maintained.”

The two other judges in the decision are Federal Court judges Datuk Nordin Hassan and Datuk Abu Bakar Jais.

The Federal Court had upheld the conviction and sentence against Pathmanabhan, Thilaiyalagan and Kathavarayan in 2017, when a five-member apex bench led by the then Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria dismissed their appeal.

The Court of Appeal had earlier maintained their conviction in 2015 after the High Court found them guilty over the murder allegedly sparked by a land deal gone sour.

The apex court, however, acquitted R Matan after finding there was insufficient evidence to implicate the former farmhand with the murder.

All four were charged with murdering Sosilawati, 47, bank officer Noorhisham Mohamad, 38, lawyer Ahmad Kamil Abdul Karim, 32, and Sosilawati's driver Kamaruddin Shamsuddin, 44, at Lot 2001, Jalan Tanjong Layang, Tanjung Sepat, Banting between 8.30pm and 9.45pm on Aug 30, 2010.

Counsel Latheefa Koya, who appeared for Kathavarayan, informed the bench that her client is withdrawing the appeal.

The review of the death sentence follows the passing of the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 (Act 846) that now gives courts the discretion to impose an imprisonment of 30 to 40 years’ and not less than 12 strokes of whipping in place of the compulsory death sentence.

This week’s hearing consists of the final batch of prisoners who are staring at execution orders in the hope of escaping the noose following amendments and implementation of the Act 846 since last year.

In one of the longest submissions for review lasting over two hours, counsel Manjeet Singh Dhillon for Pathmanabhan said the High Court judge had failed to consider that the modus operandi of the murders was not conclusively established.

Manjeet highlighted that the judge said initially there was blunt force trauma followed by burning, but had also mentioned that they were burnt to death.

“As the court failed to find the modus operandi, we say that the court should not consider the rarest of the rare in determining in maintaining the death sentence,” he said, noting that Pathmanabhan had already been in prison for 14 years since 2010.

Manjeet said that Pathmanaban had been staring in horror at being on death row and had a vision of the hanging noose on him while suffering the pain and loneliness of incarceration for the past 14 years.

Amer Hamzah Arshad for Thilaiyalagan adopted what was submitted by Manjeet and further argued that being the youngest of the accused, his client should be given the second chance to continue with his life as he wanted to pursue a degree as he is also taking basic computer courses in prison.

“This shows that the prison sentence had managed to reform him, and he ought to be given a second chance,” he said.

Deputy public prosecutor Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar opposed the alternative prison sentence, describing the gruesome and brutal murder of the four that had shocked the country and also the judiciary.

Sosilawati and her companions have gone to Pathmanabhan’s farm to discuss recovering her RM4 million investments, and Mohd Dusuki noted that there were no signs of provocation that could have led to their deaths.

The accused have no sympathy or humanity due to the extreme violence, he said. “Even the Federal Court recognised the gruesome nature of the crime,” he continued, when it cited a description of splatters of the victims’ blood on the wall of the farmhouse and on the bat used.

“A witness also described hearing the screams of the victims and this showed there was fear and life-threatening [behaviour] leading to the tragic death of the victims,” Mohd Dusuki said in arguing that the death sentence should be maintained.

The prosecutor also pointed out that there were no graves for family members to visit as the bodies were incinerated and burnt by using logs that had been gathered earlier, indicating that the crime was premeditated or there was some sort of scheme or plan on the part of the accused.

“The murder committed reflects the abhorrent nature...the crime overrides the factor of age and reform as argued as public interests are of utmost importance,” Mohd Dusuki added.