Justice Noorin Badaruddin said circumstantial evidence adduced at trial irresistibly pointed to Nur Hussein Salleh, 42, committing the offence against Hamidah Abdul Rahman.

Noorin said this was based on information given by the accused to the police, which led to the discovery of incriminating evidence, and the conduct of the accused.

“Further, there was also evidence from a prosecution witness who saw the accused close to the crime scene,” said Noorin, who delivered the broad grounds of a three-member bench.

Justice Azmi Ariffin chaired the bench which also comprised Justice Meor Hashimi Abdul Hamid.

The bench dismissed Hussein’s appeal against conviction but allowed the prosecution’s appeal that the accused be sentenced to death.

Last year, trial judge Bhupindar Singh sentenced him to 38 years in jail and ordered that he be whipped 20 times.

Hussein committed the offence at the victim’s home in Taman Dato Leow Yan Sip in Ipoh between 12.01am and 5am on March 13, 2017.

Noorin today said the law on circumstantial evidence is trite, and may be applied when direct evidence was lacking.

“The trial judge must then give effect to all cumulative evidence in such a case,” she said, adding that Hussein’s conviction is safe.

Noorin said the bench had considered the prosecution’s appeal against the sentence, bearing in mind the deceased did not reciprocate his love.

“He had planned the murder and gave the impression he was at a nearby cybercafe, but a witness saw him near the crime scene,” she said.

Noorin said Hussein inflicted eight slash wounds on the deceased’s neck with a knife.

“He had blatant disregard for a human life,” she said, adding that he also stole valuables belonging to the deceased and her daughter before leaving the house.

Hamidah was 53, while Hussein, was 34 at the time of the incident.

Earlier, deputy public prosecutor Amril Johari submitted that Hussein had gone to a nearby cybercafe where he once worked and logged in at 2.30am but returned to the place to log out at 5.30am to give the impression he was never at the crime scene.

He, however, said four prosecution witnesses testified that they had seen him in the housing estate where the deceased lived at the time the murder was committed.

Amril said jealousy formed the motive for the murder, claiming that the deceased had refused to marry him as her daughter opposed their union.

He said the deceased had got to know a retired policeman and was engaged to him two months before the murder.

Amril said the accused exhibited a “dog in the manger” attitude -believing that if he couldn’t have what he wanted, no one else should either.

Counsel Hafiz Jalaludin submitted that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. He also said his client had put the defence of alibi that he was at a cybercafe.

In his petition of appeal, Hussein had claimed he knew Hamidah since 2013 and they were lovers.