Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Murder (section 302)

Legal area

Court

12 Jun 2025

[Jabatan Peguam Negara] RAGUNATHAN A/L SELVAMANI

Citation

BA-45B-22-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45B-22-04/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the evidence as a whole (eyewitness testimony placing accused at the scene engaging in assault and uncontradicted expert post‑mortem showing injuries sufficient in the ordinary course to cause death), prosecution proved the elements of murder under section 302 read with section 34 including mens rea under section 300(c); defendants' alibi and denials failed to raise reasonable doubt and they were therefore convicted and sentenced accordingly.
20 May 2025

[ ] 1. ) THIRUMURUGAN A/L MUTIAH 2. ) VASANTHAN A/L VEERAMOHAN 3. ) THURAIRAJU A/L GANESON 4. ) RAGU VELAN A/L MASANAM 5. ) LOGESWARAN A/L MANICKAM

Citation

BA-45B-34-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45B-34-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence shows failure to prove essential ingredients of the offence (other than identity of deceased): time/place of death per amended charge not established; eyewitness evidence is inconsistent and uncorroborated; no forensic/DNA linkage to accused; circumstantial evidence not irresistible to infer mens rea or common intention. Consequently no prima facie case — accused discharged and acquitted.
23 Apr 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] YUVANDRAN A/L VIJAYAINDRAN

Citation

WA-45B-11-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45B-11-11/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the imposed sentence of seven years' imprisonment from date of arrest and a fine of RM3000 (six months default) appropriately balanced public interest and deterrence against the respondent's substantial mitigation including guilty plea, cooperation and long remand; accordingly the prosecution's appeal against sentence is dismissed and the sentence is upheld.
4 Apr 2024

RAJAGUMAARAN A/L MARIMUTHU

Citation

PA-45B-5-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-45B-5-07/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the cumulative circumstantial evidence, corroborated by forensic pathology and corroborating witness evidence (last seen with victim, exclusive access to premises, DNA/blood on accused's clothing, delayed reporting and cleaning), established actus reus and mens rea for murder beyond reasonable doubt; accordingly the accused was convicted under s302 and sentenced to 35 years' imprisonment and 12 strokes, exercising discretion allowed by Act 846 given lack of premeditation and defendant's status as first offender.
23 Nov 2022

AZAMI BIN MOHAMED [ ]

Citation

T-05(SH)-332-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

T-05(SH)-332-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the trial judge correctly found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant intentionally used his car as a weapon to kill Rohadi bin Yaakob and attempt to kill Zakaria bin Taib, based on unchallenged eye-witness testimony, forensic medical evidence of severe/high-velocity injuries, vehicle damage analysis and appellant's own words and conduct; private defence failed and the convictions under Sections 302, 307 and 182 were affirmed.
23 Nov 2022

AZAMI BIN MOHAMED [ ]

Citation

T-05(M)-331-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

T-05(M)-331-08/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court upheld the trial judge's findings that the prosecution proved intention to kill and attempted murder beyond reasonable doubt based on deliberate use of the car as a weapon (two collisions including a U-turn), prior threats and corroborating forensic and eyewitness evidence; the private defence was rejected and the police report P64 held to be false, therefore convictions and sentences were affirmed.
28 Oct 2022

[ ] Vignes A/l Valamarajah

Citation

BA-45-24-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45-24-07/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court held prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against all three accused because identification evidence was unreliable or contradicted (victim denied 1st accused, ID parade procedures were defective and confused by identical twins, labelling errors and absence of signatures, no satisfactory linkage from motive evidence), medical and history evidence did not support assault allegations, and alibi/denials undermined identity; accordingly all accused were acquitted and discharged.
30 Sept 2019

Izwanuddin bin Kasim

Citation

J-05(M)-456-10/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

J-05(M)-456-10/2017 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Trial judge properly found that cumulative circumstantial and eyewitness evidence (notably SP14, SP15, SP11, SP12, SP18, SP26) together with forensic pathology (stab wound to the heart) and the accused's knowledge of concealment of the weapon formed an overwhelming and coherent chain pointing to the appellant's guilt; SP14 was not an accomplice whose evidence required exclusionary corroboration; failure to call Ros Elly and Hoo Chee Keong did not prejudice the prosecution and section 114(g) did not apply; therefore conviction and death sentence were safe and affirmed.