HAFIZ FARHAN BIN AZIZUL

HAFIZ FARHAN BIN AZIZUL

Magistrate held the 1 year sentence must run consecutively after completion of the 5 year sentence in AB-62D-55-04/2025 because the offences arose from different transactions occurring nearly a year apart, the accused is a recidivist, the totality principle is not breached, and public interest and deterrence justify a consecutive order under s292 CPC.

Citation
AP-83D-171-04/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: PENDAKWA RAYA; Accused: HAFIZ FARHAN BIN AZIZUL (No K/P.: 900207086221)
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 July 2025
Case Number
AP-83D-171-04/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Offence / Sentencing (reasons; Order on Concurrency)
Outcome
Convicted under amended charge and sentenced to 1 year imprisonment; sentence ordered to commence after completion of sentence in AB-62D-55-04/2025.
Legal Topics
Sentence Concurrency, Commencement of Sentence (s292 Criminal Procedure Code), Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 Provisions, Recidivism, Totality Principle
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Sentencing Criminal Procedure Sentence Concurrency Commencement of Sentence (s292 Criminal Procedure Code) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 Provisions Recidivism +1 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWA RAYA

Prosecution

HAFIZ FARHAN BIN AZIZUL (No K/P.: 900207086221)

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Offence / Sentencing (reasons; Order on Concurrency)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 1 year sentence should run concurrently with the 5 year sentence under s292 Criminal Procedure Code
  2. 2 Whether ordering the sentence to run consecutively violates the principle of totality
  3. 3 The relevance of separate transactions and recidivism to concurrency decision

Ratio Decidendi

Magistrate held the 1 year sentence must run consecutively after completion of the 5 year sentence in AB-62D-55-04/2025 because the offences arose from different transactions occurring nearly a year apart, the accused is a recidivist, the totality principle is not breached, and public interest and deterrence justify a consecutive order under s292 CPC.

Court Disposition

Convicted under amended charge and sentenced to 1 year imprisonment; sentence ordered to commence after completion of sentence in AB-62D-55-04/2025.

Orders

  • Charge under section 12(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 admitted; convicted.
  • Sentence of 1 year imprisonment imposed; sentence to run consecutively after completion of the 5 year sentence in AB-62D-55-04/2025.