Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Good behaviour bond

  • 26 Feb 2026

    NIK MOHAMMAD AZHAR BIN MOHD RABUZALIL

    Citation
    DI-62D-51-09/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    DI-62D-51-09/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    The court held that it lawfully exercised its discretion under Section 294 to order a good behaviour bond despite the applicability of Section 39C ADB 1952 because mitigating factors (guilty plea, remorse, time spent in remand, absence of a victim and rehabilitation prospects) made the bond appropriate; the bond is a deferred sentence and the conviction remains recorded.

  • 17 Dec 2025

    [ ] MOHD IZZUL ASLAN BIN YAHYA

    Citation
    DI-62D-38-07/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    DI-62D-38-07/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Court exercised its discretion under Section 294 KTJ and found that the accused's mitigation (family responsibilities, lengthy remand of about 1 year 8 months, remorse, cooperation and rehabilitation plan) justified recording the conviction but releasing him on a good behaviour bond; court ordered a bond with RM5000 security and one surety.

  • 23 Jun 2025

    [ ] MUHAMAD UMRAM FAISAL BIN MOHD AZHRI

    Citation
    DI-62JSK-11-07/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    DI-62JSK-11-07/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    The Sessions Court correctly exercised its discretion under s.293(1)(b) read with s.294 KTJ to grant a two‑year good behaviour bond with one surety and a RM12,000 deposit to the accused who was a youthful offender at the time of the offence despite the offence under s.376(1) carrying a mandatory term of imprisonment, on grounds of age, early plea, remorse, delay in reporting and the public interest in rehabilitation.

  • 5 Feb 2025

    PENAMA XXXX

    Citation
    RA-84-43-09/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    RA-84-43-09/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    The court accepted the unqualified guilty plea as properly taken and proved the offence under section 109 Penal Code read with section 14(b) Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017. Balancing public interest, deterrence and the child's rehabilitation and considering welfare reports, age, remorse, OKU status and family support, the court imposed a non-custodial order: 60 aggregate hours of community service under section 91(1)(da) Child Act to be completed within six months and ordered the father to ensure attendance under section 93(1)(e). A sole good behaviour bond was insufficient given t…

  • 5 Feb 2025

    PENAMA XXXX

    Citation
    RA-84-44-09/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    RA-84-44-09/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Court accepted the unqualified guilty plea, found the offence proven under section 14(b) Akta 792, and imposed a non-custodial rehabilitative disposal: a two-year good behaviour bond with RM2000 surety plus mandatory monthly police reporting and supervised intervention by Jabatan Kebajikan Masyarakat, because mitigation (age, remorse, family support, rehabilitation prospects and OKU status) outweighed the need for immediate custody while still addressing public interest and deterrence.

  • 31 Jan 2025

    BOBBY BIN JUNIT

    Citation
    JC-83-35-01/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    JC-83-35-01/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Court found accused guilty of an offence under section 323 read with section 326A Penal Code; interpreted s326A as amended to afford judicial discretion (imprisonment may extend to twice maximum) rather than mandating a fixed double term; concluded s323 read with s326A is not compoundable and a good behaviour bond is not available for domestic violence offences; balancing public interest, prior conviction, guilty plea and mitigation, imposed imprisonment of 3 months from date of arrest (28.1.2025).

  • 22 Jan 2025

    PENAMA XXXX

    Citation
    JC-84-49-12/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    JC-84-49-12/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Having weighed public interest and need for deterrence against the welfare, age (16), first‑offender status, full probation report, early guilty plea, lack of evidence of violence, remorse and strong family supervision, the court exercised its discretion under s.91(1)(b) Child Act 2001 to avoid custodial/Henry Gurney disposition and instead ordered release on a 3‑year good behaviour bond with RM1,000 surety and a 1‑year parental bond with specified supervisory and counselling conditions.

  • 6 Nov 2024

    PENAMA XXXX

    Citation
    RA-84-40-09/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    RA-84-40-09/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Court accepted the unconditional guilty plea, found the facts and exhibits proved the offence under s14(b) Akta 792, and imposed a two-year Good Behaviour Bond under s91(1)(b) Akta Kanak-kanak with RM1000 surety plus mandatory JKM reporting and attendance at JKM workshops under s93(1)(a) and s93(1)(b), balancing public interest and deterrence with the offender's age, first-offence status, learning disability and strong family support to prioritise rehabilitation over institutionalisation.

  • 5 Mar 2024

    CINNARAJ A/L SREEDARAN

    Citation
    MC-83D-653-05/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    MC-83D-653-05/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    The court held that section 294 CPC applies to the offence under section 39A(1) DDA because the offence is non‑serious (maximum five years) and, on the facts — early guilty plea, first offender, demonstrable remorse and rehabilitative prospects — a good behaviour bond is an appropriate alternative to immediate imprisonment; accordingly the accused was convicted, bound over under s294 CPC for 3 years with RM5,000 bond and one surety for the s39A(1) count and fined RM1,500 (default 3 months imprisonment) with 2 years supervision for the s15(1) count.

  • 25 Oct 2023

    PENAMA XXXX

    Citation
    BJ-84-9-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    BJ-84-9-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    The court accepted the guilty pleas as voluntary and properly recorded, gave weight to the JKM report and mitigating factors (age, first offence, parental willingness) but also to public interest and seriousness of destruction of public property, and therefore imposed a non‑custodial but significant rehabilitative and deterrent order: 100 hours community service to be completed within 6 months plus a 2‑year good behaviour bond for parents/guardians secured by RM1000.