Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Alibi defence

Legal area

Court

12 Feb 2026

Mohamad Hamzi bin Mohd Kasmadi

Citation

JA-44-1-01/2026 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-44-1-01/2026 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The application is dismissed: the charges are not defective because each count gives sufficient certain notice (month, precise location, victim identity and manner) for an offence under s14(d) SOACA 2017 where date/time are not essential; the applicant has not demonstrated actual prejudice under s156 CPC (no specific alibi particulars or corroborating witnesses identified); the application is also premature because the prosecution may amend charges before judgment; any minor defect would be curable under s422 CPC.
29 Jun 2025

AMINUDDIN BIN JUSOH @ YUSOF

Citation

TE-82JS-1-07/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

TE-82JS-1-07/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Although the prosecution established a prima facie case at the close of its case and accused was called to answer, the defence evidence raised a reasonable doubt as to the accused's presence at the scene on the material date (alibi supported by witnesses and scheduling records) and exposed investigative gaps (no punch card attendance produced); on the whole evidence the doubt was real and acquittal and discharge were required.
12 Jun 2025

[Jabatan Peguam Negara] RAGUNATHAN A/L SELVAMANI

Citation

BA-45B-22-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45B-22-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the evidence as a whole (eyewitness testimony placing accused at the scene engaging in assault and uncontradicted expert post‑mortem showing injuries sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death), prosecution proved the elements of murder under section 302 read with section 34 including mens rea under section 300(c); defendants' alibi and denials failed to raise reasonable doubt and they were therefore convicted and sentenced accordingly.
12 Jun 2025

[Jabatan Peguam Negara] RAGUNATHAN A/L SELVAMANI

Citation

BA-45B-22-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45B-22-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution proved all essential ingredients of murder under s.302 read with s.34 because expert post‑mortem evidence established injuries sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death (s.300(c)) and eyewitness evidence and other corroboration established that the accused were present and participated in inflicting those injuries forming a common intention; defence alibis and explanations failed to raise reasonable doubt; accordingly the accused were guilty and duly sentenced to lengthy imprisonment and strokes.
12 Jun 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] NAVUKARASAN A/L RETHINASINGAM

Citation

BA-45B-31-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45B-31-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the evidence considered maximally and in light of the Court of Appeal remit, the prosecution proved all elements of murder under section 302 read with section 34: death caused by multiple blunt force trauma proved by post-mortem and medical evidence; injuries were of a kind ordinarily sufficient to cause death (s.300(c)); eyewitness testimony placed all three accused at the scene actively participating; defendants' alibi evidence was inconsistent or not credible and failed to raise reasonable doubt; accordingly defendants convicted and sentenced.
27 Aug 2024

MUHAMMAD KHAIRUANUAR BIN BAHARUDDIN [ ]

Citation

05(L)-75-05/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

L
Case number

05(L)-75-05/2024(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

The Federal Court allowed the Public Prosecutor's appeal, set aside the Court of Appeal's substitution, and restored the High Court murder conviction under s.302 because the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the respondent intentionally inflicted injuries falling within s.300(c) (medical evidence of severe blunt head trauma sufficient to cause death, last-seen-together, opportunity and post-event conduct indicating consciousness of guilt), the alibi failed to raise reasonable doubt, and lack of premeditation or malice did not negate the elements of s.300(c). The death sentence w…
7 Feb 2024

[ ] Amin bin Abdullah

Citation

Q-05(LB)-352-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

LB
Case number

Q-05(LB)-352-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held the trial judge erred in finding that reasonable doubt was raised; notwithstanding flaws in the second identification parade, eyewitness recognition corroborated by medical and investigative evidence established the respondent's identity and guilt beyond reasonable doubt, therefore the acquittal was quashed and the respondent convicted of murder (s302) and two counts of grievous hurt (s326).
1 Mar 2023

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] MOHD HALMIZI BIN MAT JIDIN

Citation

CB-62JSK-23-06/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

CB-62JSK-23-06/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Court convicted because prosecution proved all elements of section 14(a) AKSTK 2017: victim was a child; credible and consistent identification by the child corroborated by caregivers and CIC recordings; medical experts confirmed an acute anal fissure consistent with penetration by a hard object (excluding constipation); defence alibi was inconsistent and uncorroborated and accused admitted presence at home within material time — therefore no reasonable doubt remained.
17 Nov 2022

Htwee Nu Maung [ ]

Citation

B-05(M)-428-10/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-428-10/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the conviction was safe: cumulative circumstantial evidence established that the appellant participated in the stabbing and inflicted injuries sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death under s300(c) Penal Code; the trial judge's credibility findings were not vitiated and there was no merit in new issues raised at appeal; therefore conviction and death sentence were upheld.
23 Oct 2020

ADAM BIN HASSAN

Citation

PA-42S-27-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-42S-27-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Trial judge misdirected by rejecting a properly notified alibi at close of prosecution; prosecution failed to investigate or rebut the alibi (including failure to secure CCTV and to call the original investigating officer) and there was no positive identification by the child; cumulative defects made the conviction unsafe and appellate court quashed the conviction and acquitted the appellant.