Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Voluntarily causing hurt
  • 13 Mar 2026

    LIM CHONG ZHEN

    Citation
    JG-85-29-03/2026 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    JG-85-29-03/2026 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Despite the defendant's guilty plea and personal mitigation, the court held that the unprovoked repeated physical assault causing facial lacerations and the weight of public interest and deterrence required a custodial sentence; a short term of imprisonment was proportionate and appropriate under s.323.

  • 30 Nov 2025

    ZAMRI BIN RANI

    Citation
    TE-82-1-08/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    TE-82-1-08/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused personally caused the injuries with a parang (element of s324) because of credible alternative version that SD2 used the parang, inconsistencies and absence of forensic confirmation; therefore accused acquitted of s324 but convicted under s323 via s169(2) KTJ for voluntarily causing hurt; sentence fixed at RM2,000 fine or six months imprisonment in default.

  • 25 Jul 2024

    [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] FAZMI AZIZI BIN ISMAIL

    Citation
    CB-82-8-05/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    CB-82-8-05/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    High Court had found a prima facie case; trial court must therefore assess defence only on whether it raises reasonable doubt. Accused's pre‑incident conduct demonstrated he 'sought' provocation so proviso (a) to Exception 1 of s.300 applies and provocation defence fails; prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt for offence under s.323 read with s.326A; accused convicted and sentenced accordingly.

  • 30 Nov 2023

    LINA AZURA BINTI AHMAD BASARI

    Citation
    WA-83-7533-11/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    WA-83-7533-11/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Although the prosecution established a prima facie case that the accused made a kicking action (video P9) amounting to an assault, the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the kick caused the victim’s injury as charged under s323 read with s326A due to material inconsistencies in injury descriptions; therefore the court amended the charge under s167 and convicted the accused of assault under s352 based on the proved kicking act and sentenced her to a fine and costs with default imprisonment terms.

  • 13 Sept 2020

    TIMBALAN KUMAR A/L SIGAMANI

    Citation
    JA-62J-12-02/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    JA-62J-12-02/2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    The court upheld the sentence of 4 years imprisonment and one stroke as appropriate and within judicial discretion under s.394 Penal Code after balancing the accused's early guilty plea and mitigation against the seriousness of the offence and public interest; the facts indicated moderate culpability and moderate harm, justifying the imposed sentence.