MUHAMMAD HAIKAL HAKIMI BIN ABDULLAH

MUHAMMAD HAIKAL HAKIMI BIN ABDULLAH

The court accepted the guilty plea as valid because the accused, represented by counsel, was orally confirmed to be of full age at the time of plea, the charge and full statement of facts were read and the accused admitted them without qualification in clear language; Section 83(3) Child Act 2001 applies where the charge is made after the accused attains 18 and does not impose an obligation to obtain a JKM report or advisers, therefore the court lawfully exercised its sentencing powers under s83(2)(c) and imposed imprisonment; given the accused's youth, prior concurrent Henry Gurney orders and need to avoid redundancy, a custodial sentence of 4 months commencing from conviction with...

Citation
PB-83D-3272-08/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor (Pendakwa Raya); Accused: Muhammad Haikal Hakimi bin Abdullah (No Kad Pengenalan: 070507021243)
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 August 2025
Case Number
PB-83D-3272-08/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Magistrate Court (drug Offence) / Conviction and Sentencing; Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (reasons for Judgment)
Outcome
Guilty plea accepted; accused convicted under Section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952; sentence imposed
Legal Topics
Guilty Plea Validity, Sentencing Principles, Application of Child Act S83(3), Mandatory Post Release Supervision (aadk), Use of Prior Juvenile/henry Gurney Orders
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Juvenile/child Law Criminal Procedure Guilty Plea Validity Sentencing Principles Application of Child Act S83(3) Mandatory Post Release Supervision (aadk) +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 5 Authorities cited 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor (Pendakwa Raya)

Prosecution

Muhammad Haikal Hakimi bin Abdullah (No Kad Pengenalan: 070507021243)

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Magistrate Court (drug Offence) / Conviction and Sentencing; Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence (reasons for Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the guilty plea was valid and unequivocal under s178(2) CPC
  2. 2 Whether Section 83(3) Child Act 2001 requires a social/behavioural report or presence of advisers when the accused attains 18 before hearing
  3. 3 Appropriate sentencing given accused's youth, prior Henry Gurney orders and public interest

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the guilty plea as valid because the accused, represented by counsel, was orally confirmed to be of full age at the time of plea, the charge and full statement of facts were read and the accused admitted them without qualification in clear language; Section 83(3) Child Act 2001 applies where the charge is made after the accused attains 18 and does not impose an obligation to obtain a JKM report or advisers, therefore the court lawfully exercised its sentencing powers under s83(2)(c) and imposed imprisonment; given the accused's youth, prior concurrent Henry Gurney orders and need to avoid redundancy, a custodial sentence of 4 months commencing from conviction with...

Court Disposition

Guilty plea accepted; accused convicted under Section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952; sentence imposed

Orders

  • Convicted of an offence under Section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  • Imprisonment for 4 months commencing from date of conviction