ZAINUDDIN BIN MAHMUD

ZAINUDDIN BIN MAHMUD

Material and significant contradictions in the chief prosecution witness's evidence and the unreliability of the P22 record, combined with acceptance of SP5's account and the prosecution's failure to call two material witnesses, destroyed the prosecution's proof of possession and therefore of distribution; accordingly there was no prima facie case and the accused was acquitted.

Citation
KA-45A-29-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: KAMALIZA Binti Md Zain; Defendant: Zainuddin bin Mahmud
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 January 2025
Case Number
KA-45A-29-09/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Drugs / Trial Judgment After Close of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case; accused acquitted and discharged.
Legal Topics
Possession of Narcotics, Distribution/offence Under Section 39 B Dangerous Drugs Act, Chain of Custody, Adverse Inference Under S114(g) Evidence Act, Credibility of Prosecution Witness, Presumption Under S37(da) Dangerous Drugs Act
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics Law Evidence Law Criminal Procedure Possession of Narcotics Distribution/offence Under Section 39 B Dangerous Drugs Act Chain of Custody Adverse Inference Under S114(g) Evidence Act +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

KAMALIZA Binti Md Zain

Prosecution

Zainuddin bin Mahmud

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Drugs / Trial Judgment After Close of Prosecution Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the seized drugs were the same exhibits and properly identified
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution proved that the drugs were in the accused's possession or control
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution proved the offence of distribution under s39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952

Ratio Decidendi

Material and significant contradictions in the chief prosecution witness's evidence and the unreliability of the P22 record, combined with acceptance of SP5's account and the prosecution's failure to call two material witnesses, destroyed the prosecution's proof of possession and therefore of distribution; accordingly there was no prima facie case and the accused was acquitted.

Court Disposition

Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case; accused acquitted and discharged.

Orders

  • Accused Zainuddin bin Mahmud is acquitted and discharged from the charge preferred under Section 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.
  • No order as to costs.