MOHD SHAHIR BIN AHMAD DEWI

MOHD SHAHIR BIN AHMAD DEWI

Trial judge’s credibility findings of PW4, corroborating circumstances and admissible recordings established that the First, Second and Fourth Appellants corruptly solicited and/or obtained gratification and that they participated in a common intention; statutory presumption under s.50(1) MACC Act was not rebutted by affirmative evidence; by contrast prosecution produced no evidence of any act or facilitation by the Third Appellant to satisfy the participation requirement of s.34, so his convictions could not stand.

Citation
JA-42R(A)-7-03/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
First Appellant: Mohamad Zulhisham bin Zulkafli; Second Appellant: Mohd Shahir bin Ahmad Dewi; Third Appellant: Muhammad Azim bin Muhamad Adnan; Fourth Appellant: Mohamed Syukur bin Ghulam Mohamed; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
A
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 January 2026
Case Number
JA-42R(A)-7-03/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (macc Act Offences) / Rehearing Under Section 316 Criminal Procedure Code
Outcome
Appeals of First, Second and Fourth Appellants dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed. Appeals of Third Appellant allowed; convictions on First and Second Charges set aside; Third Appellant acquitted and discharged.
Legal Topics
Corruption (macc Act), Common Intention (s.34 Penal Code), Statutory Presumption (s.50 MACC Act), Attempt Vs Preparation, Admissibility of Recordings, Sentencing and One‑transaction Rule
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑corruption Law Evidence Law Police Misconduct Corruption (macc Act) Common Intention (s.34 Penal Code) Statutory Presumption (s.50 MACC Act) Attempt Vs Preparation +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 7 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mohamad Zulhisham bin Zulkafli

First Appellant

Mohd Shahir bin Ahmad Dewi

Second Appellant

Muhammad Azim bin Muhamad Adnan

Third Appellant

Mohamed Syukur bin Ghulam Mohamed

Fourth Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (macc Act Offences) / Rehearing Under Section 316 Criminal Procedure Code

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved each element of offences against all appellants
  2. 2 Whether s.34 Penal Code (common intention) was correctly applied to convict all four
  3. 3 Whether evidence sufficed to convict Third Appellant under s.34

Ratio Decidendi

Trial judge’s credibility findings of PW4, corroborating circumstances and admissible recordings established that the First, Second and Fourth Appellants corruptly solicited and/or obtained gratification and that they participated in a common intention; statutory presumption under s.50(1) MACC Act was not rebutted by affirmative evidence; by contrast prosecution produced no evidence of any act or facilitation by the Third Appellant to satisfy the participation requirement of s.34, so his convictions could not stand.

Court Disposition

Appeals of First, Second and Fourth Appellants dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed. Appeals of Third Appellant allowed; convictions on First and Second Charges set aside; Third Appellant acquitted and discharged.

Orders

  • First Appellant Mohamad Zulhisham bin Zulkafli: appeals dismissed; convictions under s.16(a)(B) MACC Act 2009 read with s.34 Penal Code and s.17(a) MACC Act 2009 read with s.34 Penal Code affirmed; sentences of Sessions Court of 13.2.2025 affirmed.
  • Second Appellant Mohd Shahir bin Ahmad Dewi: appeals dismissed; convictions on First Charge (s.16(a)(B) MACC Act 2009 read with s.34 Penal Code), Second Charge (s.17(a) MACC Act 2009 read with s.34 Penal Code) and Third Charge (s.17(a) MACC Act 2009) affirmed; sentences affirmed.