MUHAMAD SHAZIL ASHRAF BIN SAIDAN

MUHAMAD SHAZIL ASHRAF BIN SAIDAN

The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because material and irreconcilable discrepancies in prosecution evidence—chiefly the disputed presence of the Proton Persona and conflicting eyewitness accounts including SP5 and the admissible connected report D25—undermined the credibility of the alleged eyewitness account that the accused discarded the package; absence of reliable evidence on the ownership/possession element meant the accused was discharged and acquitted.

Citation
DF-83D-854-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Muhamad Shazil Ashraf bin Saidan
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 May 2025
Case Number
DF-83D-854-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Offence (possession of Methamphetamine) / Post Prosecution Judgment (acquittal at Close of Prosecution Case)
Outcome
Accused discharged and acquitted (no prima facie case)
Legal Topics
Prima Facie Case, Admissibility and Relevancy (evidence Act 1950 S5, S6), Credibility of Witnesses, Chain of Events / Connected Transactions, Possession Offences (dangerous Drugs Act 1952 S12(2), S39 A(1)), Judicial Notice and Related Proceedings
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Narcotics Law Prima Facie Case Admissibility and Relevancy (evidence Act 1950 S5, S6) Credibility of Witnesses Chain of Events / Connected Transactions Possession Offences (dangerous Drugs Act 1952 S12(2), S39 A(1)) +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 6 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Muhamad Shazil Ashraf bin Saidan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Offence (possession of Methamphetamine) / Post Prosecution Judgment (acquittal at Close of Prosecution Case)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case against the accused
  2. 2 Whether the accused had possession, custody or control of the seized drugs
  3. 3 Admissibility and relevance of IDD25 (D25) as connected transaction evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because material and irreconcilable discrepancies in prosecution evidence—chiefly the disputed presence of the Proton Persona and conflicting eyewitness accounts including SP5 and the admissible connected report D25—undermined the credibility of the alleged eyewitness account that the accused discarded the package; absence of reliable evidence on the ownership/possession element meant the accused was discharged and acquitted.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and acquitted (no prima facie case)

Orders

  • Document IDD25 received and admitted as defence exhibit D25
  • Accused released and acquitted without being called to enter defence