Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Penetration

  • 29 Jul 2025

    Hamizal Bin Osman

    Citation
    BA-62JS-4-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    BA-62JS-4-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    On maximum evaluation the prosecution proved both elements of rape: that the accused's penis was inserted into the complainant's vagina (penetration) and that the act was without her consent; supporting evidence included the complainant's consistent core account, police reports, corroborating witness testimony about the accused's presence and conduct, and medical findings; defence denial and supporting witnesses failed to raise a reasonable doubt. Accordingly the accused was convicted under Section 376(1) Penal Code and sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment with ancillary police supervision and…

  • 24 Jul 2022

    MOHAMAD ASRI AFIQ BIN ZUL [ ]

    Citation
    DA-42JSKS-1-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    DA-42JSKS-1-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court held that the trial judge did not err: the elements of s376(1) were proven beyond reasonable doubt by the complainant's credible and detailed testimony supported by medical and witness evidence; s402A alibi notice was not triggered; formal s118 competency testing was unnecessary; inconsistencies were minor; therefore conviction and sentence were affirmed.

  • 1 Jan 2021

    ABDUL RAHMAN BIN ROSLI

    Citation
    DA-42S-9-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    DA-42S-9-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Victim's testimony of penile penetration was corroborated by medical evidence of hymen tears and prompt complaint; because the victim was under sixteen consent was irrelevant; missing offered witnesses were not material and did not amount to suppression warranting adverse inference; accordingly the conviction and the sentence were upheld.

  • 29 Jun 2020

    MOHD NASIR BIN ABDUL GHANI

    Citation
    DA-42JSKLB-2-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    DA-42JSKLB-2-02/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Second charge: acquittal affirmed because the respondent successfully established an alibi on balance of probabilities (witnesses SD4 and SD5 credible) and raised reasonable doubt. First charge: acquittal set aside because the defence alibi evidence (SD2 and SD3) was improbably consistent and appeared tailored to fabricate corroboration; penetration was proved by the victim’s credible testimony and medical findings; accordingly respondent convicted on the first charge and sentenced to 18 years' imprisonment and 10 strokes of whipping.

  • 27 Feb 2020

    PENDAKWARAYA Timbalan MBR

    Citation
    BH84-11-02/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    BH84-11-02/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Although the Sexual Offences Against Children Act permits conviction on uncorroborated child evidence, the court found SP1 was not of tender years but her testimony was materially inconsistent, vague on the crucial fact of penetration, and not corroborated by police or medical reports; therefore prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case and the accused was acquitted and discharged under Child Act s90(10).