Ahmad Choirul Mustaqim

Ahmad Choirul Mustaqim

Court preferred the detailed retrospective expert opinion (Dr Ian) over the earlier, less detailed report (Dr Yeoh), found the accused suffered schizophrenia and at the time of the offence was incapable of appreciating the nature or wrongness of his actions under s.84 Penal Code on the balance of probabilities, therefore the accused was acquitted and, pursuant to s.348(1) CPC, ordered to be detained in a psychiatric facility.

Citation
JA-45B-12-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Ahmad Choirul Mustaqim
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
19 September 2025
Case Number
JA-45B-12-04/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Murder (s.302 Penal Code) / Trial — Defence Case Concluded; Judgment on Insanity and Disposition Recorded
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged on ground of mental disorder (legal and medical insanity) under s.84 Penal Code; ordered detained for safe custody.
Legal Topics
Murder, Insanity Defence, Section 84 Penal Code, Burden of Proof (s.105 Evidence Act), Psychiatric Expert Evidence, Detention Under S.348 CPC
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Mental Health Law Procedural Law Murder Insanity Defence Section 84 Penal Code Burden of Proof (s.105 Evidence Act) +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Ahmad Choirul Mustaqim

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Murder (s.302 Penal Code) / Trial — Defence Case Concluded; Judgment on Insanity and Disposition Recorded

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused proved the defence of unsoundness of mind under s.84 Penal Code on the balance of probabilities
  2. 2 Whether psychiatric evidence closer in time to the offence (P28A) or retrospective expert assessment (D30) should be preferred for legal insanity determination
  3. 3 Whether, if insanity established, safe custody order under s.348(1) CPC is appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

Court preferred the detailed retrospective expert opinion (Dr Ian) over the earlier, less detailed report (Dr Yeoh), found the accused suffered schizophrenia and at the time of the offence was incapable of appreciating the nature or wrongness of his actions under s.84 Penal Code on the balance of probabilities, therefore the accused was acquitted and, pursuant to s.348(1) CPC, ordered to be detained in a psychiatric facility.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged on ground of mental disorder (legal and medical insanity) under s.84 Penal Code; ordered detained for safe custody.

Orders

  • Accused acquitted and discharged on ground of mental disorder pursuant to s.84 Penal Code
  • Order for detention of accused at Hospital Permai, Tampoi, Johor under section 348(1) Criminal Procedure Code