Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sexual offences against children

Legal area

Court

20 Apr 2026

MAHAT BIN MOHD DIN

Citation

WA-42JSKS-3-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-42JSKS-3-04/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court dismissed the appeals: the trial judge did not err in accepting SP5 as a credible witness supported by independent eyewitness testimony of SP4 and corroborative exhibits including CIC recording and a section 112 statement; the convictions were therefore safe. Sentences imposed by the Sessions Court were lawful and reasonable: offences were distinct permitting consecutive sentences, additional penalties under section 16 were properly imposed, whipping was permissible under the specific Act, and the aggregate did not breach the totality principle.
12 Apr 2026

ABDUL AZIZ B MUSTAFFA

Citation

DA-62JSK-9-04/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

DA-62JSK-9-04/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

On maximum evaluation the prosecution proved the elements of the amended charge under s376(3): credible, consistent testimony of the child victim corroborated by medical and investigative evidence established penetration, lack of consent and prohibited familial relationship; defence amounted to uncorroborated denial and failed to raise reasonable doubt; conviction and sentence under s376(3) are justified.
9 Apr 2026

CHAN KOK POH [Pegawai Pendakwa (PDRM)]

Citation

JB-42JSKS-2-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-42JSKS-2-08/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Appeal allowed because the conviction was unsafe: the prosecution failed to prove the essential element that the victim was under 18 with appropriate documentary evidence, and the continuation of the trial without the appellant's counsel on 10.10.2023 constituted a denial of the appellant's right to fair trial; accordingly the Sessions Court's conviction and sentence were set aside.
9 Jan 2026

MUHAMMAD HALIMI BIN MUHAMAD

Citation

RA-42JSKS-1-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

RA-42JSKS-1-01/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Material contradictions between the child's police report, oral testimony and the medical report, together with the prosecution's non-production of CCTV/forensic evidence, undermined the child's credibility; the trial judge misapplied the law by equating competency with credibility; as the child's testimony was the prosecution's cornerstone and is unreliable, the conviction was unsafe and must be quashed.
15 Oct 2025

LEANG WIN SON

Citation

JA-43-37-10/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-43-37-10/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

High Court declined to exercise revisionary jurisdiction because the Sessions Court's refusal to grant bail was proper: the applicant faced a serious non-bailable sexual offence against a child, displayed a pattern of offences against children including recent guilty pleas for possession of child sexual abuse materials, allegedly committed the new offence while on bail, and posed a real risk to public interest and vulnerable children; the DPP's application to adduce further affidavit was dismissed and leave to file submissions granted; thus no miscarriage of justice required intervention and…
6 Oct 2025

AKMAL HAKIM BIN HADI MUNIR

Citation

JA-42JSKLB(A)-2-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

A
Case number

JA-42JSKLB(A)-2-11/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Sessions Court's acquittal was affirmed because, on the cumulative assessment of the evidence (inconsistencies in the child witness's account, the mother's withdrawal and limited corroborative value, failure to obtain statements from other students, and the plausibility of the defendant's COVID-19 distancing defence), the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
2 Oct 2025

MOHD NAZIR BIN ZARAAI

Citation

KA-62JSK-20-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

KA-62JSK-20-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court found the prosecution proved all elements of section 14(a) AKKSTKK 2017 beyond reasonable doubt: the child victim's sworn testimony was credible and unusually convincing and was corroborated by supporting evidence (cousin's account, medical reports). Defence denials and procedural complaints (absence of DNA, vague date, non-compliance with s.28A(2), non-production of certain witnesses) did not create reasonable doubt. Therefore the accused was convicted and sentenced accordingly.
30 Jun 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] ABDULLAH BIN MD ALI

Citation

CB-62JSK-15-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

CB-62JSK-15-09/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court convicted because the victim’s sworn testimony was competent, coherent, consistent with her CIC recording and contemporaneous report to her mother, and was supported by independent medical examination showing old hymenal tears consistent with penile penetration; the accused’s denials were inconsistent, his own Section 112 statement admitted repeated sexual touching of the child, and defence explanations failed to raise a reasonable doubt; accordingly prosecution proved all elements beyond reasonable doubt for both charges.
27 May 2025

PENAMA XXXX

Citation

DC-84-13-04/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DC-84-13-04/2025 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Where an adequate rehabilitative order already exists in a related proceeding (placement at Sekolah Tunas Bakti with counselling), a court may lawfully release a juvenile with a warning under s.91(1)(a) without imposing a guardian's good behaviour bond under s.93(1); s.93(1) is not invariably mandatory and must be read harmoniously with s.91(1)(a) in light of the Act's purposive objectives and the best interests of the child.
11 Mar 2025

MUHAMMAD FAIZAL BIN MOHAMMAD MAZLAN

Citation

BC-62JSK-124-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BC-62JSK-124-08/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court held that despite the seriousness of sexual offences involving a 16-year-old, the accused's youth, first-offence status, genuine remorse, positive JKM social report and evidence suggesting consensual conduct justified a non-custodial disposal; accordingly the bound-over order under Section 294 KTJ for two years with RM3,000 surety per count (total RM9,000) was appropriate and affirmed.