Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admissibility under s27 evidence act

Legal area

Court

11 Dec 2025

MUHAMMAD SHAFI BIN RASHIDI

Citation

KB-45A-32-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KB-45A-32-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the type and weight of the drugs (chemical analysis), possession and knowledge (direct testimony of arresting officer and defendant's direction to the hidden stash recorded in Exhibit P7) and that statutory presumptions of trafficking applied; the defence denial failed to rebut those presumptions or raise reasonable doubt, and therefore the accused was guilty on all three counts under section 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.
30 Oct 2024

Mohamad Syaiffulrizam Bin Busu

Citation

KA-45A-21-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45A-21-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court accepted prosecution evidence as credible: chemist analysis, uninterrupted chain of custody, accused's information/acts under s27 leading to discovery, proximity and control of exhibits and evidence excluding reasonable third-party access; statutory presumption under s37(da) applied and was not rebutted on balance of probabilities, therefore accused had possession and trafficked; conviction on all charges and sentences imposed accordingly.
11 Sept 2023

XXXX

Citation

W-05(SH)-277-08/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

W-05(SH)-277-08/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

On full review the Court of Appeal found the prosecution adduced a coherent and compelling circumstantial case against PKK1: positive identifications by SP68/SP69 corroborated by CCTV, forensic evidence of accelerant and gas cylinders, and conduct pointing (discovery of lighter) satisfied elements three and four of murder under s300(d); SP70/SD3 were correctly classified as accomplices/rancak sejenayah whose inconsistent testimony was rightly rejected or treated with caution; PKK1's alibi/denials did not raise a reasonable doubt. Conversely, prosecution failed to eliminate reasonable inferenc…
23 Aug 2021

PENDAKWARAYA TPR MUHAMMAD AMIRUL BIN NOOR HASHIMI 1. ) MOHD EZUL AFFKAR BIN RAMLI 2. ) MOHD ZAMANI BIN ABDUL RANI

Citation

NE-83D-916-10/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

NE-83D-916-10/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

OKT1 convicted because prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that he had custody and control of the vehicle and the concealed bag containing 7.25g methamphetamine; his conduct (handing keys and pointing to the vehicle) and the absence of any credible alternative explanation established both control and knowledge (or invoked the statutory presumption under s37(d)). Chain of custody and chemist's evidence were intact and admissible. OKT2 was acquitted because prosecution failed to prove proximity, control or knowledge linking him to the exhibits.

Malaysia Case Law

MUHAMMAD SHAFI BIN RASHIDI

Mohamad Syaiffulrizam Bin Busu

XXXX

PENDAKWARAYA TPR MUHAMMAD AMIRUL BIN NOOR HASHIMI 1. ) MOHD EZUL AFFKAR BIN RAMLI 2. ) MOHD ZAMANI BIN ABDUL RANI