Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Admissibility of conduct evidence

Legal area

Court

5 Jun 2025

[Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa

Citation

AB-41H(A)-3-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

A
Case number

AB-41H(A)-3-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court upheld the Sessions Court conviction under s.385 because the prosecution proved that the accused, a police officer, put the complainants in fear of exposure and referral to religious authorities in order to dishonestly obtain money (RM300 paid), the trial judge's credibility assessments were not perverse, and the defence did not raise a reasonable doubt; the rape charge failed for lack of proof of penetration and insufficient corroboration. Sentence was increased from 3 to 5 years due to abuse of police powers, public interest and deterrence considerations.
10 Feb 2025

1. ) NG MEE YEE 2. ) Ho King Lim [ ]

Citation

W-05(M)-128-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

W-05(M)-128-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

On the facts the appellants, as the sole tenants and occupants of the unit where a sizeable concealed package of methamphetamine (777.3g) was discovered in the wardrobe used by them, were so situated as to have custody and control and the requisite knowledge; the trial judge properly weighed direct and circumstantial evidence, permissibly invoked the statutory presumption under s37(d) DDA (without applying an unconstitutional double presumption), and therefore the prosecution proved possession and trafficking beyond reasonable doubt; convictions affirmed and, in mitigation and pursuant to the…
11 Jan 2023

CHUA CHONG YIAO [ ]

Citation

W-05(M)-112-03/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

W-05(M)-112-03/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held that the appellant's contemporaneous conduct of pointing to and removing the bags was admissible under s8(2) Evidence Act and not a 'statement' requiring s37B caution; possession was proven by direct evidence (personal items found in the seized bag and appellant's conduct) without reliance on s37(d), while s37(da) applied to support trafficking given the heroin weight; credibility findings of the trial judge were entitled to deference; consequently convictions and sentences were safe and the appeal was dismissed.

Malaysia Case Law

[Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] Mohd Aman Bin Mustapa

1. ) NG MEE YEE 2. ) Ho King Lim [ ]

CHUA CHONG YIAO [ ]