Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Distribution

Legal area

Court

30 Oct 2025

MUHAMMAD ASYRUL IMAN BIN OSMAN

Citation

KA-45A-52-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45A-52-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Although prosecution established a prima facie case at the close of its case (drugs identified, weighed and chain of custody shown, and statutory presumption of distribution raised due to weight), the defence adduced evidence that created a reasonable doubt on accused's care, control and knowledge of the drugs and rebutted the presumption of distribution on the balance of probabilities; consequently prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and the accused is acquitted.
3 Oct 2025

1. ) ALVIN RAJ A/L ANDREW ROY 2. ) MITHRA A/P R.SELVAKUMAR

Citation

BA-45A-19-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-19-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution failed to prove beyond prima facie that either defendant had control, custody and knowledge of the methamphetamine or that they shared a common intention to traffic it; close proximity was insufficient, investigation was inadequate and material witnesses (the renter Xeno Cravier and arresting officers) were not called such that s114(g) was engaged; therefore no prima facie case and defendants acquitted.
8 Sept 2025

[ ] AMIRUL ASYRAF BIN ABDUL RAZAK

Citation

KA-45A-28-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45A-28-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that accused had actual possession, control and knowledge of the drugs found in his locked room based on observation, discovery of paraphernalia and accused's conduct; chemist's analysis reliably identified heroin (110.6g) and monoacetylmorphines (42.3g) and sampling/chain issues raised by defence did not undermine findings; presumptions of distribution under perenggan 37(da)(i) and (iii) ADB 1952 applied; failure to call lab assistants did not justify adverse inference; distinct drugs justified separate charges; accordingly accused convicted on both…
18 Jun 2025

1. ) CHUA HOCK BENG 2. ) LEE KEE TEIK

Citation

KA-45A-37-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45A-37-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Although prosecution proved the seized substances were scheduled drugs and maintained chain of custody, it failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had exclusive possession, control and the requisite knowledge or that there was a common intention with the co-accused; inconsistencies in police evidence and credible alternative access to the premises created reasonable doubt, requiring acquittal.
3 Jun 2025

MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA

Citation

BA-45A-149-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-149-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either defendant had sole or joint possession, control or knowledge of the seized drugs and failed to maintain a clear, consistent chain of custody and seizure narrative; material inconsistencies about seizure location and failure to produce critical evidence rebutted the statutory presumption and created reasonable doubt, requiring acquittal on the charged counts.
21 May 2025

Wan Mohd Efizan Bin W. Mohd Shamli

Citation

B-05(SH)-224-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-224-05/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the appeal in respect of the s39B distribution charge (P2) because the prosecution failed to prove distribution beyond reasonable doubt and the appellant successfully rebutted the s37(da) presumption as to distribution; the conviction and sentence under s39B were quashed and the appellant acquitted on that count. The Court dismissed the appeal against the s12(2)/s39A(1) possession-with-intent/joint-intent charge (P4), finding the prosecution had proven possession and joint intent beyond reasonable doubt; that conviction and sentence were affirmed.
17 Jan 2025

[Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MOHD ZULHAIMI BIN MOHARANI 2. ) NADIA NATASHA BINTI MOHAMED ZAIDI

Citation

BA-45A-89-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-89-08/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution failed to prove two essential elements at the prima facie stage: exclusive physical possession/control of the seized drugs and knowledge of their nature by the accused. The presence of third‑party DNA on seized items, lack of ownership of the flat and vehicle by the accused, and unreliable/insufficient CCTV stills raised reasonable doubt. While chemical analysis and chain of custody for the drugs were established, those facts alone did not link the accused to possession or distribution. Accordingly the court found no prima facie case and discharged the accused without calling them…
9 Oct 2024

MUHAMMAD ARIF BIN MAJID [ ]

Citation

B-05(M)-154-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

B-05(M)-154-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Because the vehicle was under the appellants' control at the material time, identical class drugs were found on their persons, the quantity of methamphetamine and its concealment in the armrest gave rise to a strong inference of knowledge and intent to distribute, and the appellants failed to rebut the s.37(d) presumption on the balance of probabilities, the convictions under s.39B(1)(a) ADB read with s.34 KC are upheld.
23 Jul 2024

[ ] AFIQ AFIZI BIN ABDULLAH

Citation

KA-45-22-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45-22-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court ruled defence preliminary objection to multiple charges was without merit because prosecutorial discretion permits separate charges for distinct scheduled drugs found in a sample; however at close of prosecution the court found material and unexplained discrepancies in the chain of custody and identity of exhibits (markings, dates, delivery/receipt records, newspaper wrappers, and motorcycle evidence) that created reasonable doubt as to identity and possession, thus prosecution failed to make out a prima facie case and the accused was discharged and acquitted without being called to ent…
23 Jul 2024

[ ] AFIQ AFIZI BIN ABDULLAH

Citation

KA-45A-60-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45A-60-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Material and unexplained discrepancies in the chain of custody and identity of the seized exhibits (conflicting markings, dates/receipts, handling records and unresolved issues about the motorcycle/exhibit return) created reasonable doubt as to the identity of the drugs and prevented the prosecution from establishing a prima facie case on possession and distribution; accordingly the accused must be discharged without being called to answer.