1. ) MD FAIZAL BIN MD BAKRI 2. ) MOHAMAD FAZIL BIN MD BAKRI

1. ) MD FAIZAL BIN MD BAKRI 2. ) MOHAMAD FAZIL BIN MD BAKRI

Prosecution failed to discharge burden of establishing prima facie case because it did not prove that the drugs were under the custody, control or possession of the accused (Element B); critical nexus between seized drugs and the vehicle was not established (vehicle not tendered/marked and photographs insufficient), thus undermining proof of possession and negating need to decide knowledge and common intention; accordingly both accused were discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution case.

Citation
BA-45A-154-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: MD FAIZAL BIN MD BAKRI; Accused: MOHAMAD FAZIL BIN MD BAKRI
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 July 2024
Case Number
BA-45A-154-12/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Trafficking / End of Prosecution Case (decision on Prima Facie)
Outcome
Both accused discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution case (no defence called)
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Common Intention, Prima Facie Standard, Chain of Custody, Admissibility of Photographs
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Trafficking Possession Common Intention Prima Facie Standard Chain of Custody +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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

MD FAIZAL BIN MD BAKRI

Accused

MOHAMAD FAZIL BIN MD BAKRI

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Trafficking / End of Prosecution Case (decision on Prima Facie)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved a prima facie case for trafficking methamphetamine
  2. 2 Whether the accused had possession, control and knowledge of the drugs (elements of possession)
  3. 3 Whether there was common intention under Section 34 Penal Code

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to discharge burden of establishing prima facie case because it did not prove that the drugs were under the custody, control or possession of the accused (Element B); critical nexus between seized drugs and the vehicle was not established (vehicle not tendered/marked and photographs insufficient), thus undermining proof of possession and negating need to decide knowledge and common intention; accordingly both accused were discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution case.

Court Disposition

Both accused discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution case (no defence called)

Orders

  • Order of acquittal recorded and accused discharged and acquitted; prosecution failed to make out prima facie case; no further proceedings on the charge at this stage