Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Common intention

Legal area

Court

25 Feb 2026

TAUFIK HIDAYAH BIN ABDULLAH

Citation

N-05(SH)-321-08/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

N-05(SH)-321-08/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Court held there was no miscarriage of justice: trial judge properly assessed credibility and proximity of SP3, supported by scene evidence and forensics; common intention under s.34 established; failure to call Pathma did not prejudice defence sufficiently to warrant reversal; spousal evidence (SP18) admissible as given and corroborative; convictions under s.302 and s.326 and imposed sentences were safe and upheld.
22 Feb 2026

[ ] 1. ) Noor Nazmi Bin Nawi 2. ) Muhammad Hamdee Bin Che Hashim

Citation

DA-45A-31-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-45A-31-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because material doubts existed as to the identity and chain of custody of seized exhibits, the accused lacked proved custody, control or dominion over the drugs, poisons, firearm and vehicle given accessibility to third parties, and there was no evidence of a pre-arranged common intention or actual participation; accordingly the accused were discharged and released without being called to enter their defence.
22 Feb 2026

[ ] 1. ) Noor Nazmi Bin Nawi 2. ) Muhammad Hamdee Bin Che Hashim

Citation

DA-45D-1-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

DA-45D-1-10/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case on all counts because (1) serious doubts existed as to the identity and chain of custody of the seized exhibits (labels and markings did not match between seizure and items received by the chemist), (2) the prosecution failed to prove exclusive possession, custody or control and knowledge by the accused given the accessible premises and vehicle and absence of linking personal effects, and (3) there was no evidence of pre-arranged common intention. Consequently the accused were discharged and freed without being called to enter defence.
8 Dec 2025

VIJI KUMAR A/L RAJOW

Citation

K-05(H)-207-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

K-05(H)-207-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court found sufficient direct evidence of possession and knowledge because officers observed the appellants handling and placing small drug packets into a larger bag at the time of the raid; however the trial court erred by effectively applying a 'presumption upon a presumption' when treating deemed possession under s.37(d) as sufficient to invoke the s.37(da) trafficking presumption without a separate affirmative finding of found possession. Consequently convictions for trafficking under s.39B(1)(a) were unsafe and were quashed; convictions substituted to possession under s.12(2) DDA wit…
9 Sept 2025

1. ) XXXX 2. ) DINESWARAN A/L SIVALINGAM [ ]

Citation

W-05(M)-98-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

W-05(M)-98-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the appeal in part: it accepted the prosecution's representation to reduce the charge to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (conviction entered under section 299 punishable under section 304(a) read with section 34), set aside the death sentences and substituted each with a custodial sentence of twelve years' imprisonment backdated to date of arrest (17 August 2017) after considering the facts, public interest, mitigation and current sentencing trends.
26 Aug 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MUHAMAD SHAHRUL NAIM BIN MOHAMAD ZAIN 2. ) HASHIM TENDOT BIN ABDULLAH

Citation

WA-45A-70-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45A-70-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On maximum evaluation the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because material gaps and reasonable doubts existed regarding exclusive possession and knowledge (presence of third party Najib, failure to call housing agent Main Uddin, reliance on out-of-court statement P25), chain of custody and timeline inconsistencies; therefore accused were acquitted and discharged under s180(2) CPC.
27 May 2025

1. ) Mohd Nazri Bin Wahab 2. ) Wan Hamdan Bin Wan Hashim [ ]

Citation

J-05(SH)-567-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

J-05(SH)-567-11/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court upheld the trial judge's factual findings that prosecution proved possession, control and knowledge of 54.52g of monoacetylmorphines by both appellants; the quantity exceeded the statutory minimum and hence s.37(da) presumption of trafficking applied; agent provocateur evidence under s.40A was admissible and credible; inconsistencies were immaterial and did not undermine core proof; appellants failed to rebut the presumption on balance of probabilities, therefore convictions and sentences were affirmed.
27 May 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MURUKAN A/L RAMAKRISHNAN 2. ) RAJA SEKAR SELVAM

Citation

W-05(LB)-402-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

LB
Case number

W-05(LB)-402-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the prosecution had adduced a prima facie case of possession and trafficking against the accused based on the quantity and location of drugs, contemporaneous conduct, proximity and statutory presumptions; the deficiencies complained of (unproduced CCTV, phones, pink bag, non‑attendance of some third parties) did not constitute withholding or suppression of material evidence to attract an adverse inference under s114(g); therefore the High Court was wrong to discharge the accused at the close of prosecution and the acquittal was set aside and the accused ordered to be called to…
30 Apr 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) Michael Ting Siew Su 2. ) Robinson Anak Sumping

Citation

WA-45A-4-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45A-4-02/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the prosecution established physical possession and the presumption of trafficking arose, but on full evaluation the second accused raised a reasonable doubt as to knowledge and common intention and was acquitted; the first accused had mens rea possession but the evidential link pointed to a third party (Dang Chee Ho) as the principal trafficker so trafficking was not proved beyond reasonable doubt and the first accused was convicted of the lesser offence of possession under s12(2) DDA read with s39A(2) and sentenced accordingly.
22 Jan 2025

1. ) ZULKEFFLI BIN MD SAB 2. ) MOHD ALLIF BIN ALIAS

Citation

AA-82D-11-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AA-82D-11-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Although identity of the seized substance as Mitragynine and the chain to the chemist were proved, the prosecution failed to prove that the accused had knowledge of and exclusive control or power of disposal over the substance or that there was joint intention; therefore no prima facie case was made out and the accused must be acquitted at the close of the prosecution case.