1. ) NOOR DANIAL HAMIZAN BIN MOHD NOOR 2. ) MUHAMMAD AZEEM BIN ABDUL RAHMAN 3. ) MOHAMAD ARIFF HAIKAL BIN ARAPIN

1. ) NOOR DANIAL HAMIZAN BIN MOHD NOOR 2. ) MUHAMMAD AZEEM BIN ABDUL RAHMAN 3. ) MOHAMAD ARIFF HAIKAL BIN ARAPIN

The court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the elements of Section 375B via the victim's credible, detailed and consistent testimony corroborated by eyewitness SP4, circumstantial evidence and medical findings; defence versions were assessed as afterthoughts or bare denials and failed to raise reasonable doubt, therefore the accused were convicted and punished accordingly.

Citation
AG-62JSK-12-07/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Noor Danial Hamizan bin Mohd Noor; Accused: Muhammad Azeem bin Abdul Rahman; Accused: Mohamad Ariff Haikal bin Arapin
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 June 2025
Case Number
AG-62JSK-12-07/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (sexual Offence Gang Rape Under Section 375 B Penal Code) / Conviction and Sentencing (judgment Delivered)
Outcome
Accused convicted under Section 375B Penal Code; OKT2 and OKT3 sentenced to imprisonment; OKT1 dealt with by good conduct bond due to youth.
Legal Topics
Rape, Gang Rape, Prima Facie, Identification Evidence, Circumstantial Evidence, Sentencing, Youth Offender
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Child Protection Rape Gang Rape Prima Facie Identification Evidence Circumstantial Evidence +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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Noor Danial Hamizan bin Mohd Noor

Accused

Muhammad Azeem bin Abdul Rahman

Accused

Mohamad Ariff Haikal bin Arapin

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (sexual Offence Gang Rape Under Section 375 B Penal Code) / Conviction and Sentencing (judgment Delivered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved all elements of Section 375B (victim under 16, penetration, common intention) beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether prosecution evidence (victim testimony, eyewitness SP4, circumstantial evidence, medical report) is credible and sufficient for conviction
  3. 3 Whether defence evidence raised reasonable doubt or constituted an afterthought/bare denial

Ratio Decidendi

The court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the elements of Section 375B via the victim's credible, detailed and consistent testimony corroborated by eyewitness SP4, circumstantial evidence and medical findings; defence versions were assessed as afterthoughts or bare denials and failed to raise reasonable doubt, therefore the accused were convicted and punished accordingly.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted under Section 375B Penal Code; OKT2 and OKT3 sentenced to imprisonment; OKT1 dealt with by good conduct bond due to youth.

Orders

  • OKT 2 and OKT 3 sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment each from date of conviction; subjected to 2 years' supervision after completion of sentence and ordered to undergo counselling while incarcerated.
  • OKT 1 placed on a good behaviour bond for 3 years under Section 91(1)(b) with one bond of RM6,000 and two sureties, one of whom must not be an immediate family member.