Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Abolition of mandatory death penalty

Legal area

Court

30 Jan 2026

NAZRI BIN MOHAMMAD

Citation

BL-45A-25-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BL-45A-25-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held prosecution proved a prima facie case: chemical analysis identified substantial quantities of heroin and monoacetylmorphines; the drugs were found in an open bag on the front passenger seat in immediate physical proximity to the accused, the sole occupant, establishing possession and knowledge (actual possession or statutory custody/control), and the quantity supported inference of distribution; defence explanations were uncorroborated and failed to raise reasonable doubt; accordingly accused convicted under s39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and sentenced to life imprisonment…
2 Jul 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] WESLEY LOH CHEE YOU

Citation

CB-45A-8-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

CB-45A-8-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the seized exhibits were methamphetamine totalling 769.9g (P9) and that the accused had possession, control and knowledge of the bag containing the drugs as shown by witness testimony and CCTV; chain of custody and laboratory explanations were sufficient so the s37(da) presumption of trafficking applied and the defence failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; accused convicted under s39B(1)(a) DDA and, having considered sentencing principles including abolition of mandatory death penalty and facts of the case, death was not appropriat…
25 Nov 2024

MOHD HASNI BIN ISMAIL

Citation

KA-46A-1-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-46A-1-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court accepted prosecution evidence as credible: recovered cannabis was identified by chemist, chain of custody intact, drugs were in vehicle controlled and driven solely by accused, circumstantial facts permitted inference of knowledge; accused's third‑party story (Mat John) rejected as fabricated and did not rebut presumption under s37(da); therefore prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt and accused convicted of trafficking under s39B(1)(a).
11 Nov 2024

Mahathir Bin Usman [ ]

Citation

S-05(M)-508-12/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

S-05(M)-508-12/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Conviction was affirmed on evidence and statutory presumption; pursuant to the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 which vests sentencing discretion, and with the prosecution's agreement, the Court set aside the death sentence and substituted it with life imprisonment for thirty years from date of arrest and twelve strokes of whipping based on the totality of evidence, sentencing factors pleaded and statutory framework.
21 Oct 2024

MOHD MUNAWAR MOHD AZIZAN [ ]

Citation

Q-05(M)-175-04/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

Q-05(M)-175-04/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the appeal on sentence, set aside the death sentence and substituted it with thirty years' imprisonment effective from 09.10.2018 and twelve strokes of whipping because the amended law (Act 846 and s39B) confers sentencing discretion, the prosecution failed to prove this was an exceptional case warranting death, and mitigating factors (cannabis as a soft drug, comparatively small quantity, first offender and prospects of reform) supported commutation.
28 Aug 2024

Kamaruddin Bin Abd Rahim [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

A-05(M)-14-01/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

A-05(M)-14-01/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held that the prosecution proved a prima facie case and, on full review of the evidence including credible eyewitness testimony, forensic links and the pathologist's findings that injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, the conviction for murder was safe and must be affirmed; however, applying the current statutory framework abolishing the mandatory death penalty and assessing mitigating factors, the death sentence was excessive and was substituted with 30 years' imprisonment effective from arrest date and 12 strokes of the rotan.
21 Jun 2024

MUHAMMAD RAMZAN

Citation

B-05(M)-158-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-158-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held that the trial judge correctly found a prima facie case and that the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt by the totality of credible witness testimony and converging circumstantial evidence (including statement leading to discovery, DNA linking Perayu 2, possession of the deceased's phone and conduct of the appellants); therefore convictions under Section 302 read with Section 34 KK were upheld. However, applying the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2022 and considering that the offences were not of the 'rarest of the rare' class, the mandatory death senten…
15 Feb 2024

KOVINDA SAMY A/L THEVARAYAN

Citation

B-05(M)-351-10/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-351-10/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Physical possession of dangerous drugs found in the motorcycle compartment in the immediate presence of the appellant supported an inference of direct ownership and trafficking; alleged errors (reference to non-existent exhibit P40, failure to call certain persons, minor inconsistencies in police report) did not undermine the core evidential basis; appellant's sworn denial was a bare denial insufficient to create reasonable doubt; conviction upheld and sentence varied under the discretionary framework provided by the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 to 30 years' imprisonment and…
6 Dec 2023

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MOHD ZAIDI BIN MOHD ZAIN 2. ) TENGKU HAZARUL ISMAIL BIN T HAMID

Citation

WA-45C-2-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45C-2-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

With the abolition of the mandatory death penalty for kidnapping by Act 846 s52, the offence no longer attracts death; therefore the Sessions Court is a court of competent jurisdiction under ss63-64 SCA. The High Court has the statutory power under paragraph 12 of the Schedule to the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 to transfer proceedings to a subordinate court. The prior consent of the PP under s177A CPC does not prevent the High Court from exercising its judicial power to transfer the case; accordingly the High Court ordered transfer of the listed criminal cases to the Sessions Court Kuala Lu…
14 Aug 2023

[ ] San Sary

Citation

DA-45A-24-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-45A-24-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the prosecution proved chain of custody and chemical identity of the seized items, established the accused as sole occupant with custody and control, and inferred knowledge from concealment and packaging; possession therefore attracted the statutory presumption of trafficking and a prima facie case was proved which the accused failed to rebut, leading to conviction on all counts.