Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 12(2) dda

Legal area

Court

24 Nov 2025

Mohd Izad Bin Matap

Citation

B-05(SH)-177-04/2025 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

B-05(SH)-177-04/2025 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court found the trial judge correctly preferred the prosecution's account over the defence: objective evidence (backpack on appellant, chemistry report) and quantities established custody, control, knowledge and trafficking; D22 was unreliable and contradicted by SD2's plea and testimony; no miscarriage of justice or legal error was shown, therefore conviction and sentences are safe and affirmed.
2 Apr 2024

1. ) MOHD SHARIFUDDIN BIN ZAKARIA 2. ) MOHD FAIZROL BIN ZAKARIA

Citation

NF-82D-3-05/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

NF-82D-3-05/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Prosecution failed to prove the primary element of possession—control and knowledge—because the storeroom was accessible to others, items were contained and not openly attributable to accused, and the prosecution did not call the co-accused who had confessed; therefore no prima facie case existed and the accused was discharged without being called to enter defence.
11 Apr 2023

MOHAMAD ARIFFUDIN BIN MOHAMAD ZULKIFLI

Citation

TC-83D-324-03/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

TC-83D-324-03/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the seized substance was methamphetamine (11.20g) and that the accused had possession and knowledge because the drug was found in his hand and he nodded to admit it; the defence account was a bare denial and failed to raise reasonable doubt; accordingly conviction under Section 12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 was upheld and the sentence of 30 months imprisonment and three strokes of the cane was appropriate and confirmed.
4 May 2021

PENDAKWARAYA 1. ) ATCHUTH RAM NAIR A/L KUMAR 2. ) YUGENDRAN A/L MARIYAPEN

Citation

PA45A-49-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA45A-49-06/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because it did not prove custody or control of the packets by the accused sufficient to trigger the statutory presumption under s37(d) DDA—material contradictions about how the drugs were discovered, absence of proof that the boot compartment was a hidden compartment, lack of exclusive possession or control of the vehicle by the accused, and investigative gaps (missing reports, fingerprints and witness traces) left reasonable doubt; accordingly trafficking and common intention under s34 were not established and the accused were acquitted…

Malaysia Case Law

Mohd Izad Bin Matap

1. ) MOHD SHARIFUDDIN BIN ZAKARIA 2. ) MOHD FAIZROL BIN ZAKARIA

MOHAMAD ARIFFUDIN BIN MOHAMAD ZULKIFLI

PENDAKWARAYA 1. ) ATCHUTH RAM NAIR A/L KUMAR 2. ) YUGENDRAN A/L MARIYAPEN