MOHD KHAIRUDIN BIN ABDULLAH

MOHD KHAIRUDIN BIN ABDULLAH

Prosecution failed to prove beyond prima facie threshold that accused had exclusive possession, control and knowledge of the seized cannabis due to material gaps: failure to call or tender available and relevant witness statements (including deceased ex-wife's recorded statement), presence of evidence indicating third‑party access (DNA on cigarette butt), and inconsistencies in prosecution witnesses' accounts; therefore no prima facie case under s.180 Criminal Procedure Code and accused must be discharged without being called to enter defence.

Citation
KB-45-6-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Mohd Khairudin bin Abdullah (OKT)
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 January 2026
Case Number
KB-45-6-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Narcotics / Trial Judgment Accused Discharged Without Call to Enter Defence
Outcome
Accused discharged and acquitted; no call to enter defence on all three charges
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking Presumption, Chain of Custody, Chemical Analysis of Exhibits, Uncalled Witnesses / S.114(g) Evidence Act, Prima Facie Burden Under S.180 Criminal Procedure Code
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics Law Evidence Law Possession Trafficking Presumption Chain of Custody Chemical Analysis of Exhibits Uncalled Witnesses / S.114(g) Evidence Act +1 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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Mohd Khairudin bin Abdullah (OKT)

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Narcotics / Trial Judgment Accused Discharged Without Call to Enter Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved that accused possessed and trafficked cannabis under s.39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  2. 2 Whether identity and weights of seized drugs were proved and chain of custody established
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved exclusive control/possession and knowledge given possible access by third parties

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to prove beyond prima facie threshold that accused had exclusive possession, control and knowledge of the seized cannabis due to material gaps: failure to call or tender available and relevant witness statements (including deceased ex-wife's recorded statement), presence of evidence indicating third‑party access (DNA on cigarette butt), and inconsistencies in prosecution witnesses' accounts; therefore no prima facie case under s.180 Criminal Procedure Code and accused must be discharged without being called to enter defence.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and acquitted; no call to enter defence on all three charges

Orders

  • Accused discharged and released on all three charges
  • All exhibits (except documents) to be returned to police for safekeeping pending disposal of any appeal