KHAIRUL IZZUDDIN BIN A RODZI

KHAIRUL IZZUDDIN BIN A RODZI

Prosecution proved identity of the substance as methamphetamine (8.20g) by credible chemist evidence and maintained an unbroken chain of custody; eyewitness evidence placed the exhibit in the accused's right front pocket and supported inference of control and knowledge; contradictions in prosecution testimony were...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
JF-83D-524-10/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused/appellant: Khairul Izzuddin bin A Rodzi
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
7 January 2026
Case Number
JF-83D-524-10/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judgment and Sentence (magistrates' Court)
Outcome
Accused found guilty, convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Drugs, Chain of Custody, Prima Facie Standard, Alcontara Notice, Sentencing Principles
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Possession of Controlled Drugs Chain of Custody Prima Facie Standard Alcontara Notice Sentencing Principles

Source-derived case record

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 6 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Khairul Izzuddin bin A Rodzi

Accused/appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment and Sentence (magistrates' Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved that the seized substance was a dangerous drug
  2. 2 Whether the drug was in the accused's possession, control and knowledge
  3. 3 Whether chain of custody of the exhibit was intact

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution proved identity of the substance as methamphetamine (8.20g) by credible chemist evidence and maintained an unbroken chain of custody; eyewitness evidence placed the exhibit in the accused's right front pocket and supported inference of control and knowledge; contradictions in prosecution testimony were minor and not material; defence failed to raise a reasonable doubt or provide sufficient Alcontara particulars; accordingly accused was guilty under s12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and duly sentenced to 30 months imprisonment and three strokes.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty, convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • Accused convicted under Section 12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with Section 39A(1) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  • Sentence: 30 months imprisonment and three strokes of the cane