YAZID BIN ABDUL RANI

YAZID BIN ABDUL RANI

Prosecution failed to prove the possession element because it did not exclude access by others to the premises or investigate/co‑call identified persons with regular access (Iqbal and Nasir), and there was no forensic or other incriminating nexus linking the accused to the seized drugs; therefore no prima facie case existed and the accused must be acquitted at the close of the prosecution case.

Citation
AJ-83D-77-01/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Yazid bin Abdul Rani
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 October 2025
Case Number
AJ-83D-77-01/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Possession (s.12(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952) / End of Prosecution Case Accused Acquitted at Close of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged at close of prosecution case
Legal Topics
Possession, Chain of Custody, Prima Facie Burden of Proof, Admissibility of Chemical Analysis, Accessibility/exclusivity of Premises
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Law Evidence Law Possession Chain of Custody Prima Facie Burden of Proof Admissibility of Chemical Analysis Accessibility/exclusivity of Premises

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Yazid bin Abdul Rani

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Possession (s.12(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952) / End of Prosecution Case Accused Acquitted at Close of Prosecution Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the seized substance was a dangerous drug listed under the First Schedule
  2. 2 Whether the accused had possession (control and knowledge) of the drug
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution established an unbroken chain of custody

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to prove the possession element because it did not exclude access by others to the premises or investigate/co‑call identified persons with regular access (Iqbal and Nasir), and there was no forensic or other incriminating nexus linking the accused to the seized drugs; therefore no prima facie case existed and the accused must be acquitted at the close of the prosecution case.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged at close of prosecution case

Orders

  • Accused Yazid bin Abdul Rani is acquitted and discharged from the charge under s.12(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952
  • No further action ordered against the accused on this charge