Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Credibility of witnesses

Legal area

Court

1 Mar 2026

ZULKHAIRI BIN ASHARI

Citation

TE-83D-48-01/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

TE-83D-48-01/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court acquitted because, after assessing all evidence, the defence presented a credible and consistent alternative narrative supported by witnesses and evidence of an earlier arrest which the prosecution failed to explain or properly investigate and failed to produce material documents; these factors together created a reasonable doubt as to possession and knowledge required for conviction, obliging acquittal under established authority and section 173(m) KTJ.
19 Jan 2026

ABDUL HAKAM BIN ABDUL HARIS

Citation

TF-83D-256-05/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

TF-83D-256-05/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Material and unexplained contradictions between prosecution witnesses (police) and SP7 about whether the green plastic (P5) was in the accused's hand, combined with lack of independent forensic corroboration and viable alternative inferences, meant prosecution failed to prove custody/control, possession and knowledge to the requisite prima facie standard; accused must be discharged.
16 Jan 2026

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] SHEAGER A/L ADEKKAPACHI

Citation

WA-45A-6-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45A-6-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution proved possession beyond reasonable doubt by chemist confirmation of drugs, the accused's admission and direction to the vehicle, his control of the car keys and presence at the vehicle when the contraband was found; the presumption of trafficking was rebutted on the accused's unrebutted explanation implicating third parties, but that did not negate possession; therefore conviction on both counts for possession was appropriate and concurrent imprisonment imposed.
5 Jan 2026

MOHAMMAD ALAM BIN MOHAMMAD ZAKARIA [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

J-05(SH)-250-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

J-05(SH)-250-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Court found that the trial court erred in failing to consider material corroborative evidence (investigator's account of recorded statements) and the appellant's cautioned statement together with other prosecution evidence; on balance of probabilities the appellant raised private defence such that the murder conviction under s302 could not be sustained but supported conviction for culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s304(a); accordingly the s302 conviction and sentence were quashed and substituted with a s304(a) conviction and a 16-year imprisonment from date of arrest 30.8.2022.
30 Dec 2025

MOHAMAD HAFIZI BIN SAAD

Citation

JA-41LB-3-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-41LB-3-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the Magistrate: on the evidence the respondent was not an arrested person when the urine was taken (s31A(1A) precondition unmet); coupled with cumulative evidentiary defects (unexplained volume discrepancy, seal/document inconsistencies, unexplained difference between screening and confirmatory results, and credibility issues) the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case and the acquittal was properly entered and must be affirmed.
28 Dec 2025

MUHAMAD FIRDAUS BIN BERAHIM

Citation

DA-83D-494-02/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DA-83D-494-02/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The prosecution failed to prove possession beyond reasonable doubt because material, irreconcilable contradictions between prosecution witnesses about how and where the arrest occurred (whether the shop was open or closed) fatally undermined the prosecution's narrative and credibility, giving rise to reasonable doubt and an adverse inference under s114(g); therefore no prima facie case was established and the accused must be discharged and acquitted.
11 Dec 2025

1. ) MOHAMAD ZAHIRI BIN ZAWAWI 2. ) ZAWAWI BIN YUSOFF MOHAMAD AKMAL BIN AZLAN

Citation

DA-A53KJ-621-06/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

DA-A53KJ-621-06/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court found the Plaintiffs' version inherently more probable based on consistent oral evidence, the police investigation findings and location of debris; Defendant's inconsistent reports and failure to call a relevant passenger justified an adverse inference; thus Defendant was 100% liable and the detailed awards for general and special damages were appropriate and reasonable given the permanent injuries and future care needs.
24 Nov 2025

Mohd Izad Bin Matap

Citation

B-05(SH)-180-04/2025 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-180-04/2025 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court upheld the High Court's finding that the prosecution proved custody, control and knowledge of the drugs and that the quantities supported an inference of trafficking; the defence evidence (including D22) was internally inconsistent, contradicted by SD2's plea and objective evidence and thus unreliable; no miscarriage of justice shown and appellate interference was unwarranted; conviction and sentence affirmed.
19 Nov 2025

Mohd Zaid Bin Abdul Mutalib Muhamad Amirul Bin Mustaffa

Citation

PA-12B-16-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-12B-16-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court’s factual findings that the pattern and location of damage (rear damage to plaintiff's motorcycle and front/left damage to defendant's motorcycle), corroboration by an independent eyewitness and a mechanic, and the defendant's multiple materially inconsistent versions rendered the defendant not credible; on the balance of probabilities the defendant was 100% liable; the appellate court will not disturb those findings because the trial judge was not plainly wrong.
2 Nov 2025

MOHAMMAD IZZE BIN SAMAT

Citation

TF-83D-304-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

TF-83D-304-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Acquittal ordered because prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had custody/control and knowledge of the methamphetamine — defence version (motorcycle ownership/position at arrest) was credible and investigative deficiencies and absence of independent corroborative evidence created reasonable doubt.