Malaysia Case Law

13 Sept 2023

[ ] CHONG LEONG MOK

Citation

WA-45B-9-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

WA-45B-9-10/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the cumulative circumstantial evidence—accused being last seen with victim, accused directing removal and disposal of vehicle, accused leading police to body location, a contemporaneous confession to a lay witness admissible under s24 Evidence Act, and autopsy confirming multiple ante-mortem stab wounds penetrating vital organs—proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused intentionally inflicted fatal bodily injuries (s300(c)), warranting conviction for murder under s302 Penal Code.

• Murder
• Section 302 penal code
• Circumstantial evidence
• Confession admissibility
• Autopsy evidence
• Sentencing discretion

19 Dec 2022

[ ] KHAIRUL AZIZI BIN ABDUL JALIL

Citation

AA-45B-6-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court

High Court

Case number

AA-45B-6-04/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the prosecution had proved identity, cause of death and that the accused intentionally inflicted the injuries: voluntary confessions, DNA on the parang and on the accused's jeans, last-seen together and other circumstantial facts collectively established guilt. Expert psychiatric evidence called by prosecution (SP18) established the accused was not psychotic or intoxicated and understood the nature and wrongfulness of his acts; the defence failed to prove legal insanity on the balance of probabilities. Accordingly the accused was convicted of murder under s300(c) Penal Code an…

• Murder
• Insanity defence
• Confession admissibility
• Prima facie case
• Dna and forensic evidence
• Section 300(c) penal code

5 Apr 2022

ZAMIRUL ALIFF BIN MOHD ZAKI [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

C-05(M)-168-06/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Court

M

Case number

C-05(M)-168-06/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Court held the extra‑judicial admissions to SP8 and SP18 were voluntary and admissible under s.17(2) Evidence Act 1950; those admissions combined with overwhelming circumstantial and forensic evidence (DNA, mobile phone identification, timeline and autopsy showing fatal stab wounds) established common intention to cause bodily injury sufficient to cause death and proved rape; convictions under s.302 read with s.34 and s.376 were safe and sentences were upheld.

• Murder
• Rape
• Confession admissibility
• Common intention
• Circumstantial evidence
• Sentencing

DATO SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM V PENDAKWA RAYA & 1 KES LAIN

Citation

DATO SERI ANWAR BIN IBRAHIM V PENDAKWA RAYA & 1 KES LAIN

Court

Malaysian court

Appeals allowed and convictions quashed because the prosecution failed to prove the time as charged (mandatory under s.153(1) CrPC), the principal witness was unreliable and in law an accomplice requiring corroboration which was lacking, and the second appellant's confession was inadmissible due to surrounding circumstances; absence of required corroboration and failure to prove essential particulars rendered convictions unsafe.

• Accomplice evidence
• Corroboration
• Confession admissibility
• Witness credibility
• Charge particulars and time
• Date of offence