[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN ALIAS 2. ) MOHAMED RIZAL BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN ALIAS 2. ) MOHAMED RIZAL BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN

Although chemist evidence established the drugs' identity, prosecution failed to prove prima facie that either accused planted, possessed or trafficked the drugs; statutory presumptions under s6B(4) and s37(da) could not be invoked to link the accused because of evidence of third‑party access, the layout and remoteness of planting areas, lack of direct evidence of ownership/control of seized bottles, and absence of proof of common intention under s34; accordingly both accused were acquitted and discharged at the close of prosecution.

Citation
CB-45-22-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: PENDAKWA RAYA; Accused: ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN ALIAS; Accused: MOHAMED RIZAL BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
12 March 2026
Case Number
CB-45-22-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial (drug Offences) / Judgment at Close of Prosecution (decision on Prima Facie Case)
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged at close of prosecution
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Cultivation, Statutory Presumptions (s6 B(4), S37(da)), Common Intention (s34 Penal Code), Prima Facie Proof, Expert Testimony
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Possession Trafficking Cultivation Statutory Presumptions (s6 B(4), S37(da)) Common Intention (s34 Penal Code) +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWA RAYA

Prosecution

ZAINAL ABIDIN BIN ALIAS

Accused

MOHAMED RIZAL BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial (drug Offences) / Judgment at Close of Prosecution (decision on Prima Facie Case)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case for cultivation under s6B ADB 1952
  2. 2 Whether prosecution established possession and ownership for s9(1)(b) ADB 1952 regarding cannabis oil
  3. 3 Whether prosecution established trafficking under s39B ADB 1952 and could invoke s37(da) presumption

Ratio Decidendi

Although chemist evidence established the drugs' identity, prosecution failed to prove prima facie that either accused planted, possessed or trafficked the drugs; statutory presumptions under s6B(4) and s37(da) could not be invoked to link the accused because of evidence of third‑party access, the layout and remoteness of planting areas, lack of direct evidence of ownership/control of seized bottles, and absence of proof of common intention under s34; accordingly both accused were acquitted and discharged at the close of prosecution.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged at close of prosecution

Orders

  • Zainal Abidin bin Alias and Mohamed Rizal bin Zainal Abidin are acquitted and discharged without being called to enter their defence.