Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Restorative justice

  • 4 Jul 2025

    MOHD SAFWAN BIN ABDUL RAHIM

    Citation
    WA-62-89-07/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    WA-62-89-07/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    The court affirmed the conviction and the sentence of one year imprisonment from date of arrest and one stroke of cane because, while the offence was serious, mitigating factors — unreserved guilty plea, first offender status, remorse, absence of evidence of public alarm — and the appropriateness of restorative justice rendered the sentence proportionate and sufficient to meet public interest and deterrence.

  • 26 Jun 2022

    Ku Muhammad Faiz Zahidi Bin Ku Shaharuzaman

    Citation
    JA-63-40-06/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    JA-63-40-06/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Given the non-violent nature of the repeated but limited dissemination to a single individual, the accused's early guilty plea, first-offender status, youth, difficult family background and absence of reoffending since charge, a fine is proportionate and imprisonment is unwarranted; imposed RM2,000 per count (8 counts) totalling RM16,000 with default custody 3 months per count (aggregate 24 months) and ordered forfeiture of exhibits P8 and P9 to the Malaysian Communications Commission.

  • 26 Jun 2022

    Ku Muhammad Faiz Zahidi Bin Ku Shaharuzaman

    Citation
    JA-63-39-06/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    JA-63-39-06/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Given the guilty plea, first offender status, youth, family hardship, confined dissemination to a single individual, absence of violence and the public interest in rehabilitation, the court found a non-custodial, proportionate sentence appropriate: fine RM2,000 per count (8 counts) totaling RM16,000 with default imprisonment of 3 months per count (aggregate default 24 months) and ordered forfeiture of exhibits P8 and P9 to the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission under s.260 CMA 1998.

  • 26 Jun 2022

    Ku Muhammad Faiz Zahidi Bin Ku Shaharuzaman

    Citation
    JA-63-37-06/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    JA-63-37-06/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Court accepted guilty pleas and mitigating factors (early plea, first offender, youth, family hardship, remorse, limited dissemination) and balanced them against public interest and deterrence under s233(3) CMA 1998; concluded non-custodial fines were appropriate: RM2,000 per count (8 counts) totalling RM16,000 with default imprisonment 3 months per count (total 24 months) and ordered forfeiture of exhibits P8 and P9 to the Malaysian Communications Commission.

  • 13 Oct 2021

    MUHAMAD FARIQ BIN AINE

    Citation
    JB-41H-29-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    JB-41H-29-12/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    No sufficient basis existed to conclude the magistrate's sentence was manifestly inadequate or improperly reached. The magistrate lawfully considered statutory sentencing ranges, the guilty plea to the alternative charge, the social report, the respondent's youth and prospects, the adverse weather as causative factor and the public interest; balancing these factors the sentence of RM5,000 (5 months imprisonment in default) and endorsement on licence was appropriate and was therefore upheld.