[TIMBALAN ] MUHAMMAD AMIRUL ASHRAF BIN MUHAMMAD SYAFIQ SURASH

[TIMBALAN ] MUHAMMAD AMIRUL ASHRAF BIN MUHAMMAD SYAFIQ SURASH

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had custody, control or exclusive possession of the 702g cannabis; statutory presumption under s.37(d) could not be invoked absent affirmative proof of custody/control; significant investigative and forensic gaps (including failure to trace/call material third party 'Alif' and absence of DNA/fingerprint linkage) created reasonable doubt such that no prima facie case under s.180 CPC was made out; accordingly the accused must be acquitted under s.180(2) CPC.

Citation
AA-45A-1-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Muhammad Amirul Ashraf bin Muhammad Syafiq
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 July 2025
Case Number
AA-45A-1-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Drugs (trafficking) / Close of Prosecution Case (prima Facie Determination Under S.180 Cpc)
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged under section 180(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession and Control, Statutory Presumption S.37(d), Prima Facie Case, Adverse Inference S.114(g)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Trafficking Possession and Control Statutory Presumption S.37(d) Prima Facie Case +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Muhammad Amirul Ashraf bin Muhammad Syafiq

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Drugs (trafficking) / Close of Prosecution Case (prima Facie Determination Under S.180 Cpc)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused had possession, custody and control of 702g of cannabis
  2. 2 Whether the statutory presumption under s.37(d) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 is applicable
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case under s.180 CPC

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had custody, control or exclusive possession of the 702g cannabis; statutory presumption under s.37(d) could not be invoked absent affirmative proof of custody/control; significant investigative and forensic gaps (including failure to trace/call material third party 'Alif' and absence of DNA/fingerprint linkage) created reasonable doubt such that no prima facie case under s.180 CPC was made out; accordingly the accused must be acquitted under s.180(2) CPC.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged under section 180(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code

Orders

  • Accused Muhammad Amirul Ashraf bin Muhammad Syafiq is acquitted and discharged of the charge under s.39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 pursuant to s.180(2) CPC.