Rahmat Khairulrijal
KUALA LUMPUR: Actor Muhammad Shah Radhi Hazvee was charged at the Ampang Magistrate's Court today with seducing a married woman with the intention of having sex with her.
The 24-year-old accused, however, pleaded not guilty when the charge was read to him before magistrate Farah Nasihah Annuar.
Clad in a striped shirt, the accused, popularly known as Shah Hazvee, was calm when he was ushered into the courtroom.
According to the charge sheet, the accused – who appeared in the drama "Kan Ku Kejar Cintamu" – enticed Nurul Haireena Isnin, whom he knows to be the wife of Syed Mukhris Syed Ismail Shahabudin, to have illicit intercourse with him.
He allegedly committed the offence at Taman Sering Ukay near Hulu Langat at about 8pm on May 25.
The offence falls under Section 498 of the Penal Code for enticing or taking away or detaining a married woman with criminal intent, which carries a maximum two years' imprisonment, or a fine, or both.
Deputy public prosecutor S. Sangitaa asked the court to impose RM6,000 bail on the accused.
However, counsel Harcharanjit Singh, who represented the accused, pleaded for minimum bail.
"My client is an artist... there is no reason for him to abscond," he said.
The court set RM2,000 bail and fixed Aug 5 for mention.
When met after the proceedings, Shah Hazvee said he would fight this case to prove his innocence.
"I will fight this to the end and let the court clear my name.
"I was detained under remand for three days to be interrogated. All I can say is the police treated me well," he said, adding that he missed his mother.
This is the second case in history where a man was charged under Section 498 of Penal Code with seducing a married woman with the intention of having an illegal intercourse.
The first case cropped out nine years ago involving a corporate figure who was brought to face the music for enticing a local celebrity.
However, the charge was dropped after the accused agreed to apologise to the celebrity's former husband for causing him embarrassment.
The accused expressed his regret that the issues raised in cross-examination by his counsels may have tarnished and sullied the reputation, character and image of the celebrity's former husband and his family.
The former husband's counsel applied to drop the charge, in compliance with Section 254 of the Criminal Procedure Code, following the apology.