Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Corporal punishment (caning)

  • 26 Jan 2026

    MD SAKIB HOSEN

    Citation
    TB-83-4-01/2026 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    TB-83-4-01/2026 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    The court held that whipping under s.6(3) is discretionary and may be excluded in appropriate cases (first offence, non‑violent conduct, mitigation). A subordinate court may alter its sentence where the proviso to s.278 KTJ applies (i.e. before the court rises for the day and where there is a clear mistake). However, administrative constraints in the court management system do not negate the substantive legal effect: although the court set a substituted sentence (higher fine, no whipping), the electronic system refused amendment on grounds of functus officio, and the court (with regret) maint…

  • 10 Oct 2024

    Muhammad Nazizam Abdullah

    Citation
    JB-42JSKH-5-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    JB-42JSKH-5-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court held the sentencing judge did not err in principle: the offences involved repeated, planned incestuous rape of a child with severe consequences, justifying a deterrent and retributive long sentence; early guilty plea entitled appellant to a limited reduction, resulting in reduction of the 30‑year term to 27 years for the seven s.376(3) counts while the s.14(a) five‑year and s.16(1) three‑year sentences and the concurrency/consecutive ordering were upheld; confusion over caning quantum was resolved by directing total of 24 strokes only.

  • 10 Oct 2024

    Muhammad Nazizam Abdullah

    Citation
    JB-42JSKH-4-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    JB-42JSKH-4-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    High Court found the sentencing judge did not err in principle but allowed the appeal in part: the concurrent 30-year terms on seven counts of rape under s.376(3) Penal Code were reduced to concurrent 27-year terms due to early plea mitigation; the 5-year sentence under s.14(a) AKKSTK 2017 and additional 3-year term under s.16(1) remain and run consecutively as ordered; ambiguity over total caning was resolved so only 24 strokes are to be administered in total.

  • 28 Jul 2021

    Abd Manap bin Fadzel

    Citation
    KA-42H-12-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    KA-42H-12-11/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court allowed the appeal in part and reduced the custodial term from 17 to 10 years (to run from date of arrest) while maintaining seven strokes of the cane because the prosecution authorities relied upon involved multiple counts and were distinguishable; the appellant's guilty plea, first‑offender status, remorse, age and health constituted sufficient mitigation to justify a reduced term while preserving deterrent effect for public interest.