1. ) MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA 2. ) CHE HASMIDI BIN CHE HASSAN

1. ) MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA 2. ) CHE HASMIDI BIN CHE HASSAN

Court found prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either accused had exclusive control, custody and knowledge of the seized drugs; defence successfully rebutted the statutory presumption under s.37(d) ADB; material evidential gaps (uncertain seizure location, broken chain of custody, failure to produce phones/CCTV/clothing and missing police reports, contradictory witness accounts and negative fingerprint results) created reasonable doubt; therefore accused were acquitted of the specified charges.

Citation
BA-45A-148-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Muzaffar bin Zaaba; Defendant: Che Hasmidi bin Che Hassan
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
3 June 2025
Case Number
BA-45A-148-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Judgment Acquittal at End of Defence
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged on specified charges
Legal Topics
Possession, Distribution/trafficking, Statutory Presumptions (s.37 Dangerous Drugs Act), Chain of Custody, Adverse Inference (s.114 Evidence Act)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Possession Distribution/trafficking Statutory Presumptions (s.37 Dangerous Drugs Act) Chain of Custody Adverse Inference (s.114 Evidence Act)

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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Muzaffar bin Zaaba

Defendant

Che Hasmidi bin Che Hassan

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Judgment Acquittal at End of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved possession, control and knowledge of drugs beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether the elements of distribution/intent to distribute were established
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumptions under s.37(d) Dangerous Drugs Act were rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

Court found prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either accused had exclusive control, custody and knowledge of the seized drugs; defence successfully rebutted the statutory presumption under s.37(d) ADB; material evidential gaps (uncertain seizure location, broken chain of custody, failure to produce phones/CCTV/clothing and missing police reports, contradictory witness accounts and negative fingerprint results) created reasonable doubt; therefore accused were acquitted of the specified charges.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged on specified charges

Orders

  • Accused Muzaffar bin Zaaba and Che Hasmidi bin Che Hassan acquitted and discharged on exhibit P2(A) (BA-45A-148-10/2022)
  • Accused Muzaffar bin Zaaba acquitted and discharged on exhibit P2(B) (BA-45A-149-10/2022)