Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Death penalty sentencing

Legal area

Court

10 Apr 2025

1. ) Abdul Wahab 2. ) Karikhlan a/l Doraisamy 3. ) MUHAMMAD RAFIQ 4. ) MOHAMED ALI ZINNAH MD SAFI

Citation

WA-45A-3-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45A-3-01/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the seized substances were Ketamine, that OKT1 had possession, control and knowledge of the drugs and that OKT1 and OKT3 participated in acts amounting to distribution and joint intention under section 34; accordingly OKT1 convicted on all three charges and OKT3 convicted on charges two and three; OKT2 and OKT4 discharged for insufficiency of proof.
23 Jan 2024

Seyedmohsen Namazikivaj Seyedreza [ ]

Citation

P-05(M)-577-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

P-05(M)-577-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the prosecution proved a manufacturing setting and unbroken chain of evidence; amendment to charge was proper and an affirmative finding of possession was not necessary where manufacturing evidence established nexus to the drugs; exhibits were admissible as identified/marked with defence present and no prejudice shown; common intention inferred from facts; convictions and death sentences of the three appellants are safe and affirmed.
29 Oct 2021

PENDAKWARAYA FEROZ BIN MOHAMED

Citation

PA-45A-78-11/2018 DAN PA-45A-79-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-45A-78-11/2018 DAN PA-45A-79-11/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On maximum evaluation the prosecution proved identity and uninterrupted chain of custody of the cannabis, established that the accused had custody, control and knowledge of the drugs found in the vehicle and at the premises, and the quantities exceeded statutory minima so the presumption of trafficking under s37(da)(vi) applied; accused's conduct in leading police to concealed drugs was admissible under s27 (or as conduct under s8), thus conviction on both counts and sentence under s39B(2) followed.
17 Jun 2020

1. Kagatree a/p Pechi 2. Murugan a/l Perumal

Citation

AB-45B 01-09/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-45B 01-09/2017 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the totality of circumstantial evidence — CCTV placing first accused at scene, discovery statement and recovered looted items linked to both accused, cohabitation and movements, admission regarding T‑shirt, credible expert pathology establishing death by asphyxia, and improbability of recent invented defences — the court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that both accused committed the act causing death under s300(c) PC in furtherance of a common intention under s34 PC; alibi and late invented defences failed to raise reasonable doubt, warranting conviction and statutory…
16 Jan 2020

ROMAN ZOLOTAROV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Citation

B-05(M)-179-04/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-179-04/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The conviction was unsafe because the trial judge failed to specify whether the case proceeded on statutory presumed trafficking or actual/direct trafficking, improperly invoked both alternatives, and failed to rule whether the statutory presumption had been rebutted; that omission prejudiced the appellant's burden and rendered the conviction and sentence unsustainable, warranting setting aside the conviction and ordering acquittal and discharge.
19 Nov 2019

Babar Ali (W/n Pakistan)

Citation

B-05(M)-301-06/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-301-06/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Duress was not established on the balance of probabilities because threats were not evidenced in phone forensics, appellant's account was inconsistent and improbable and physical evidence showed prior planning; possession and trafficking were established beyond reasonable doubt and statutory presumptions applied; therefore conviction and death sentence under s39B DDA were affirmed.
1 Jan 1900

Winfred Mukiri Nkiiri

Citation

B-05(M)-369-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-369-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court upheld the trial judge's factual findings that the appellant had custody and control of the two bags and failed, on the balance of probabilities, to rebut the statutory presumption under s37(d) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952; the circumstances supported an inference of willful blindness and intent to traffic; therefore the conviction for trafficking and the mandatory death sentence under s39B(2) were properly imposed and are affirmed.

Malaysia Case Law

1. ) Abdul Wahab 2. ) Karikhlan a/l Doraisamy 3. ) MUHAMMAD RAFIQ 4. ) MOHAMED ALI ZINNAH MD SAFI

Seyedmohsen Namazikivaj Seyedreza [ ]

PENDAKWARAYA FEROZ BIN MOHAMED

1. Kagatree a/p Pechi 2. Murugan a/l Perumal

ROMAN ZOLOTAROV PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Babar Ali (W/n Pakistan)

Winfred Mukiri Nkiiri