[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MAZIZ AFIQ BIN AWANG 2. ) Mahama Boraheng 3. ) WAN MOHAMAD KHAROY BIN AWANG
Court found prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against OKT2 and OKT3 because there was no credible evidence placing them in possession, control or knowledge of the drugs at the scene; however the prosecution adduced credible evidence against OKT1—he was driving the vehicle in which a specially constructed concealed compartment containing 3,381 grams of methamphetamine was found—so OKT1 was called to defence, thereafter convicted beyond reasonable doubt under s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.39B(2) and s.34 Penal Code; taking into account abolition of mandatory death penalty and case law, the court imposed 30 years' imprisonment from date of arrest and 12...
- Citation
- CB-45A-4-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Parties
- Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Maziz Afiq bin Awang; Accused: Mahama Boraheng; Accused: Wan Mohamad Kharoy bin Awang
- Court
- High Court
- Jurisdiction
- Malaysia
- Judgment Date
- 10 September 2025
- Case Number
- CB-45A-4-03/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal (drug Trafficking) / Judgment and Sentencing (post Trial)
- Outcome
- OKT1 (Maziz Afiq bin Awang) convicted under s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.39B(2) and s.34 Penal Code; OKT2 (Mahama Boraheng) and OKT3 (Wan Mohamad Kharoy bin Awang) acquitted and discharged (no prima facie case)
- Legal Topics
- Prima Facie Test (s.180 Cpc), Judicial Intervention Under S.165 Evidence Act, Presumptions Re Concealed Drugs (s.37 Dangerous Drugs Act), Joint Liability (s.34 Penal Code), Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty and Sentencing Discretion, Application of 'rarest of the Rare' Doctrine
- Source Language
- Malay/English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Pendakwa Raya
Prosecutor
Maziz Afiq bin Awang
Accused
Mahama Boraheng
Accused
Wan Mohamad Kharoy bin Awang
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal (drug Trafficking) / Judgment and Sentencing (post Trial)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the prosecution adduced a prima facie case under s.180 CPC against each accused
- 2 Whether judicial questioning under s.165 Evidence Act improperly usurped prosecution's role
- 3 Whether s.37(h) or s.37(da) presumptions apply to owner/operator of vehicle where drugs found concealed
Ratio Decidendi
Court found prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against OKT2 and OKT3 because there was no credible evidence placing them in possession, control or knowledge of the drugs at the scene; however the prosecution adduced credible evidence against OKT1—he was driving the vehicle in which a specially constructed concealed compartment containing 3,381 grams of methamphetamine was found—so OKT1 was called to defence, thereafter convicted beyond reasonable doubt under s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.39B(2) and s.34 Penal Code; taking into account abolition of mandatory death penalty and case law, the court imposed 30 years' imprisonment from date of arrest and 12...
Court Disposition
OKT1 (Maziz Afiq bin Awang) convicted under s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.39B(2) and s.34 Penal Code; OKT2 (Mahama Boraheng) and OKT3 (Wan Mohamad Kharoy bin Awang) acquitted and discharged (no prima facie case)
Orders
- Convict OKT1 of trafficking 3,381 grams methamphetamine under s.39B(1)(a) ADB 1952 read with s.39B(2) and s.34 Penal Code
- Sentence OKT1 to 30 years imprisonment from date of arrest (09 May 2020)
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment