MOHD NOOR IZZUDDIN BIN JAMALUDDIN

MOHD NOOR IZZUDDIN BIN JAMALUDDIN

The court found the prosecution proved a prima facie case and on the whole of evidence beyond reasonable doubt: P1A was a printed, unnumbered minute not authored or acknowledged by SP8, SP8 was verifiably absent on the date, custody and access pointed to the accused as the officer responsible and the accused's explanations were unpersuasive; intent to deceive SP2 was established when the accused told SP2 the minute existed and was authoritative. Conviction under Section 463 was therefore upheld and a custodial sentence of 10 months imposed.

Citation
AC-61-2-02/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: PENDAKWA RAYA; Defendant: MOHD NOOR IZZUDDIN BIN JAMALUDDIN
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
20 February 2025
Case Number
AC-61-2-02/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Forgery of Official Minute (sections 463/465 Penal Code) Arising From a Narcotics Investigation / Trial Concluded: Conviction and Sentencing (20/02/2025); Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence Filed
Outcome
Accused found guilty of forgery under Section 463 Penal Code and convicted; sentenced to 10 months imprisonment from 20 February 2025
Legal Topics
Forgery of Documents, Prima Facie Burden, Intention to Deceive, Police Investigation Procedures, Admissibility/forensic Printing Analysis, Sentencing Principles
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Criminal Procedure Sentencing Forgery of Documents Prima Facie Burden Intention to Deceive Police Investigation Procedures +2 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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWA RAYA

Prosecution

MOHD NOOR IZZUDDIN BIN JAMALUDDIN

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Forgery of Official Minute (sections 463/465 Penal Code) Arising From a Narcotics Investigation / Trial Concluded: Conviction and Sentencing (20/02/2025); Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence Filed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved a prima facie case under Section 463 Penal Code
  2. 2 Whether the accused forged minute P1A and intended to cause TPR Nur Diyana to believe it was authored by TPR Ainul Wardah
  3. 3 Whether deficiencies in investigation and absence of direct eyewitnesses created reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

The court found the prosecution proved a prima facie case and on the whole of evidence beyond reasonable doubt: P1A was a printed, unnumbered minute not authored or acknowledged by SP8, SP8 was verifiably absent on the date, custody and access pointed to the accused as the officer responsible and the accused's explanations were unpersuasive; intent to deceive SP2 was established when the accused told SP2 the minute existed and was authoritative. Conviction under Section 463 was therefore upheld and a custodial sentence of 10 months imposed.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty of forgery under Section 463 Penal Code and convicted; sentenced to 10 months imprisonment from 20 February 2025

Orders

  • Convicted under Section 463 Penal Code
  • Sentenced to 10 months imprisonment commencing 20/02/2025