[ ] MOHD ISA BIN ABDUL SAMAD

[ ] MOHD ISA BIN ABDUL SAMAD

Proof that the respondent received money via an intermediary established the factum of receipt which triggered the mandatory statutory presumption under s50(1) MACC Act; the respondent failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities; the Court of Appeal erred in reweighing credibility and in requiring proof beyond receipt (such as proof of solicitation or sole‑board approval) to establish a prima facie case; High Court convictions and sentence are therefore restored.

Citation
05(LB)-32-03/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Parties
Appellant: Public Prosecutor; Respondent: Mohd Isa bin Abdul Samad
Court
LB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 February 2026
Case Number
05(LB)-32-03/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Federal Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal decision set aside; High Court conviction and sentence restored
Legal Topics
Bribery (receiving Gratification), Presumption of Corruption (s50(1) MACC Act), Prima Facie Case, Rebuttable Evidential Burden, Sentencing
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑corruption Law Evidence Law Bribery (receiving Gratification) Presumption of Corruption (s50(1) MACC Act) Prima Facie Case Rebuttable Evidential Burden Sentencing

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Appellant

Mohd Isa bin Abdul Samad

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Federal Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in acquitting the respondent on nine s16(a)(A) MACC Act charges
  2. 2 Whether proof of receipt via an intermediary (SP21) triggers the s50(1) presumption of corrupt receipt
  3. 3 Whether the defence successfully rebutted the s50(1) presumption on the balance of probabilities

Ratio Decidendi

Proof that the respondent received money via an intermediary established the factum of receipt which triggered the mandatory statutory presumption under s50(1) MACC Act; the respondent failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities; the Court of Appeal erred in reweighing credibility and in requiring proof beyond receipt (such as proof of solicitation or sole‑board approval) to establish a prima facie case; High Court convictions and sentence are therefore restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; Court of Appeal decision set aside; High Court conviction and sentence restored

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Set aside Court of Appeal acquittal and discharge on nine charges