Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 31a dangerous drugs act 1952

Legal area

Court

26 Feb 2026

MOHD IZWAN BIN JARUKI

Citation

NB-82D-3-03/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

NB-82D-3-03/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Prosecution proved continuity of custody, compliance with s31A requirements, and laboratory confirmation that the sample contained amphetamine and methamphetamine; defence assertions were mere denials and failed to rebut the statutory presumption under s37(k) on the balance of probabilities; therefore defendant guilty under s15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.
15 Dec 2025

MOHD KHAIRI BIN ABDUL JABAR

Citation

CD-82D-2-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

CD-82D-2-06/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

After a maximum evaluation the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because of serious and unexplained gaps in the chain of custody, inconsistencies in witness testimony, failure of the investigating officer to investigate or verify procedures, and non-compliance with statutory requirements under s.31A, thereby creating reasonable doubt as to the identity and integrity of the urine specimen.
13 Nov 2025

MOHD ARIF AKMAL BIN RAHMAD

Citation

NB-82D-11-10/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

NB-82D-11-10/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the labelled sealed urine specimen belonged to the accused and the chain of custody was continuous; the accused was constructively under arrest such that s.31A(1A) applied and triggered the presumption under s.37(k) DDA which the defence failed to rebut on balance of probabilities; therefore conviction under s.15(1)(a) DDA was warranted and, weighing mitigation and rehabilitation, the appropriate sentence was a fine with alternative imprisonment and police supervision under s.38B.
15 Jul 2025

MOHD IKMAL HAFIFI BIN RASHID

Citation

BJ-82D-1-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BJ-82D-1-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The prosecution failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody and the identity/integrity of the urine sample: the urine bottle and photographs were not produced, escorting officers were not called, the pathologist was not called to verify the report (ID5) and the investigating officer could not account for the exhibit; these gaps defeated a prima facie case and justified acquittal at the close of the prosecution, with s114(g) invoked to draw adverse inference against the prosecution.
19 Nov 2024

MOHD AMIRUL AMRIE BIN MOHD ZIMI

Citation

AA-41LB(A)-7-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

A
Case number

AA-41LB(A)-7-09/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The appeal is dismissed because the prosecution failed to preserve and produce the primary exhibit (the urine sample bottle), allowed its destruction, relied on inconsistent and unauthenticated photographic evidence, and failed to call a material witness; these failures prevented establishment of an unbroken chain of custody and created reasonable doubt; the Magistrate's credibility findings were sustainable and therefore the acquittal must be upheld.
26 Sept 2024

NAZRI BIN ABDULLAH

Citation

DA-82D-30-10/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DA-82D-30-10/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Magistrate discharged the accused because prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case: material contradictions and procedural defects in initial urine screening undermined the identity and integrity of the specimen; the statutory requirement that the sample be taken from a 'person arrested' under s.31A DDA 1952 was not met, therefore the s.37(k) presumption could not be applied and there was no proof the accused administered the drug to himself.
29 Mar 2024

MUHAMAD MUDZAMIR BIN MAZELAN

Citation

BA-41LB(A)-5-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

A
Case number

BA-41LB(A)-5-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

On the facts the respondent was constructively arrested before providing the urine specimen; the Magistrate erred in finding non-compliance with s31A and in concluding defence raised reasonable doubt; appeal allowed and conviction entered.
27 Mar 2024

MOHAMMAD SYUKRI BIN RAMLI

Citation

AB-42S-11-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

AB-42S-11-06/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court affirmed the conviction because prosecution proved all elements: the accused selected and provided the urine sample, laboratory analysis confirmed morphine, and prior convictions were properly proved under statutory modes; s.31A requirements were met so the statutory presumption under s.37(k) applied and the accused failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; chain of custody and witness credibility were satisfactory and any minor procedural errors (missing bottle, date slip) were not legally fatal; sentence (8 years imprisonment and 3 strokes) was within the statutory…
20 Nov 2023

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] MOHD JAMEL BIN AWANG @ ZAKARIA

Citation

CB-82D-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

CB-82D-1-01/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The prosecution established a prima facie case: the chain of custody for urine sample SNB119999 was not broken, s31A allowed police collection and the GC/MS laboratory analysis proving amphetamine and methamphetamine was admissible; IGSO F103 and KKM guidelines are administrative only and not law, therefore the defendant is guilty under s15(1)(a) DDA and is sentenced to RM3,500 fine (default 8 months imprisonment) with two years supervision under s38B.
11 Oct 2023

MOHAMAD FAUZI BIN CHEK

Citation

JA-82D-5-02/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

JA-82D-5-02/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Prosecution proved chain of custody and compliance with section 31A; laboratory P10 confirmed Methamphetamine and Amphetamine which are scheduled drugs; presumption under section 37(k) applied and the accused failed to rebut it on balance of probabilities; the charge was not defective; therefore the accused was convicted under section 15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.