Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Prima facie

  • 31 Mar 2026

    PANIRSELVAM A/L SENASAMY

    Citation
    BL-45B-8-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BL-45B-8-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    On maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence (eyewitnesses SP5 and SP15, CCTV, forensic pathology and medical reports) the court found all elements of section 300(c)/302 and section 326 proven beyond reasonable doubt; accused convicted on both counts and sentenced to 35 years imprisonment and 12 strokes for murder (BL-45B-8-10/2023) and 15 years imprisonment for grievous hurt (BL-45-4-12/2023), to run concurrently.

  • 30 Mar 2026

    [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] MOHD SHUHAIRI BIN SALLEH

    Citation
    CB-45A-3-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    CB-45A-3-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Prosecution proved the case beyond reasonable doubt: accused was sole driver of the vehicle in which 23,516.2 grams of methamphetamine were found; statutory presumption under s.37(da) ADB 1952 was properly invoked to infer distribution; accused failed to rebut the presumption on balance of probabilities and the circumstances support application of wilful blindness; conviction under s.39B(1)(a) ADB 1952 followed and sentence of 30 years imprisonment and 12 strokes was imposed.

  • 30 Mar 2026

    SOM BOON LAONGKEOW A/L TONG

    Citation
    RA-83D-127-01/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    RA-83D-127-01/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Prosecution proved identity and quantity of the drug by credible chemical analysis and maintained chain of custody; factual circumstances (open container containing packets found directly in front of accused while he sat alone, observation by police, lack of evidence of others' access) established control and knowledge. Defence was a bare denial which failed to raise reasonable doubt. Accordingly, court convicted the accused under Section 12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 punishable under Section 39A(1).

  • 26 Feb 2026

    SUGAN A/L SIVARAMAN

    Citation
    BA-45A-28-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-45A-28-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case because (1) although the seized material was proven cannabis, there was reasonable doubt as to custody, control, ownership and knowledge given credible evidence of a third party's presence and access, conflicting narratives and lack of corroborative witnesses to rebut the defence; therefore the statutory presumption under s37(da)(vi) did not arise and the accused must be released without being called to enter defence.

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42S-9-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42S-9-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court was correct to infer that an order directing the accused to enter his defence imported that a prima facie case had been made out; after evaluating the totality of evidence including the complainant's credible testimony and supporting factors (complainant's background and mental health effects, accused's status and conduct, chronology and post-event conduct) the elements of rape under s.376(1) were established beyond reasonable doubt; the accused's defence was disbelief/denial with material contradictions and failed to raise reasonable doubt; and the sentence of 10 years impriso…

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court upheld the Sessions Court conviction because (1) the High Court order for the accused to enter his defence legitimately permitted the trial judge to treat a prima facie case as established; (2) the prosecution proved the elements of rape under section 376(1) by the victim's credible account corroborated by background, psychiatric evidence and post-event conduct; (3) the accused's denials were inconsistent, uncorroborated and did not raise reasonable doubt; and (4) the sentence of 10 years imprisonment and three strokes was not grossly inadequate on the facts.

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    High Court correctly held that the High Court order directing accused to enter defence necessarily implied a finding of a prima facie case; on full evaluation of all evidence including complainant's consistent testimony and supporting factual and medical evidence the elements of rape under s.376(1) were proved beyond reasonable doubt; defence did not raise reasonable doubt; sentence of 10 years imprisonment and three strokes was not grossly inadequate; both appeals dismissed.

  • 18 Dec 2025

    AZNAN BIN OSMAN

    Citation
    RA-82D-5-05/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    RA-82D-5-05/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case because material procedural defects (use of expired test strip at initial screening), unresolved inconsistencies in witness evidence and incomplete investigation undermined the reliability of the screening and chain of custody under s31A(1A); benefit of doubt given to accused and acquittal entered.

  • 2 Dec 2025

    1. ) TAI KUANG TEE 2. ) SIM MING HOOI 3. ) TAI KUANG LEE

    Citation
    KB-85-29-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    KB-85-29-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    After maximum evaluation the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt the elements of affray under Section 160 (physical fighting involving accused and others at the front of a motorcycle workshop in a public place that disturbed public peace); the defence of self-defence failed to raise a reasonable doubt; the charge and particulars were not defective; accused convicted and sentenced to fine RM1,000 or 2 months imprisonment.

  • 1 Dec 2025

    1. ) MOHD NOOR BIN YUSOFF 2. ) AHMAD SAYOTI BIN ABU TALIB

    Citation
    BA-45A-127-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-45A-127-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The prosecution failed to prove prima facie that either accused had possession, custody or control of the trafficked methamphetamine or had the requisite knowledge and nexus to the consignment; documentary and agent‑arrangement evidence alone did not establish the necessary possession/knowledge or common intention, therefore the accused were discharged without calling defence.