PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya 1. Mohamad Hafizuddin bin Mohd Nor 2. Nur Adilah binti Yub

PENDAKWARAYA Pendakwaraya 1. Mohamad Hafizuddin bin Mohd Nor 2. Nur Adilah binti Yub

Although the prosecution proved identity and weight of the drug and maintained the chain of custody, it failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either accused had exclusive control or possession. OKT2 lacked any evidence of custody or control and was discharged at close of prosecution. OKT1, despite prima facie indicators (proximity, occupancy, clothing), raised reasonable doubt through credible defence evidence of shared access and non‑exclusive control of the room and storage areas; accordingly both accused were acquitted and discharged.

Citation
WA-45A-36-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: PENDAKWARAYA; Accused (okt1): Mohamad Hafizuddin bin Mohd Nor; Accused (okt2): Nur Adilah binti Yub
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 August 2020
Case Number
WA-45A-36-08/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial Drug Trafficking Under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / Judgment After Trial (prosecution and Defence Heard)
Outcome
Both accused acquitted and discharged
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Chain of Custody, Prima Facie Burden, Admissibility Under Section 37 B ADB, Joint Possession, Proximity/animus Possidendi
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Possession Trafficking Chain of Custody Prima Facie Burden Admissibility Under Section 37 B ADB +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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWARAYA

Prosecutor

Mohamad Hafizuddin bin Mohd Nor

Accused (okt1)

Nur Adilah binti Yub

Accused (okt2)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial Drug Trafficking Under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 / Judgment After Trial (prosecution and Defence Heard)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the seized substance was a dangerous drug under the ADB
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved control/possession by OKT1 and OKT2
  3. 3 Whether quantity met statutory threshold to raise presumption of trafficking

Ratio Decidendi

Although the prosecution proved identity and weight of the drug and maintained the chain of custody, it failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either accused had exclusive control or possession. OKT2 lacked any evidence of custody or control and was discharged at close of prosecution. OKT1, despite prima facie indicators (proximity, occupancy, clothing), raised reasonable doubt through credible defence evidence of shared access and non‑exclusive control of the room and storage areas; accordingly both accused were acquitted and discharged.

Court Disposition

Both accused acquitted and discharged

Orders

  • Mohamad Hafizuddin bin Mohd Nor (OKT1) acquitted and discharged of the charge under s39B(1)(a) ADB read with s39B(2) and s34 Penal Code
  • Nur Adilah binti Yub (OKT2) acquitted and discharged of the charge