Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Consent

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court held there was no error in the trial court's findings: the prosecution proved the elements of rape under s376(1) (sexual intercourse, penetration and lack of consent) based on the complainant's credible testimony supported by corroborative background and medical/psychiatric evidence; the accused's defence amounted to bare denial and did not raise reasonable doubt; both the accused's and prosecution's appeals were dismissed and the conviction and sentence of 10 years' imprisonment and three strokes of rotan were upheld, to commence immediately with no stay.

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42S-9-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42S-9-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court was correct to infer that an order directing the accused to enter his defence imported that a prima facie case had been made out; after evaluating the totality of evidence including the complainant's credible testimony and supporting factors (complainant's background and mental health effects, accused's status and conduct, chronology and post-event conduct) the elements of rape under s.376(1) were established beyond reasonable doubt; the accused's defence was disbelief/denial with material contradictions and failed to raise reasonable doubt; and the sentence of 10 years impriso…

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court upheld the Sessions Court conviction because (1) the High Court order for the accused to enter his defence legitimately permitted the trial judge to treat a prima facie case as established; (2) the prosecution proved the elements of rape under section 376(1) by the victim's credible account corroborated by background, psychiatric evidence and post-event conduct; (3) the accused's denials were inconsistent, uncorroborated and did not raise reasonable doubt; and (4) the sentence of 10 years imprisonment and three strokes was not grossly inadequate on the facts.

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42H-35-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    High Court correctly held that the High Court order directing accused to enter defence necessarily implied a finding of a prima facie case; on full evaluation of all evidence including complainant's consistent testimony and supporting factual and medical evidence the elements of rape under s.376(1) were proved beyond reasonable doubt; defence did not raise reasonable doubt; sentence of 10 years imprisonment and three strokes was not grossly inadequate; both appeals dismissed.

  • 23 Jan 2026

    SYED SHAH IQMAL BIN SYED MOHD SHAIFUL

    Citation
    BA-42S-9-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-42S-9-09/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court correctly treated the appellate order to call the accused to enter his defence as an indication that a prima facie case existed; on full evaluation of the total evidence including the complainant's testimony and supporting material (background, conduct after the event, medical/psychiatric evidence), the elements of rape under s.376(1) were proved beyond reasonable doubt; the accused's inconsistent and unsupported defence failed to raise reasonable doubt; the sentence of 10 years imprisonment and three strokes was not grossly inadequate and should be upheld; suspension of execut…

  • 7 Sept 2025

    RULAM AKBAL BIN ABD MANAN

    Citation
    TE-83JS-1-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    TE-83JS-1-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    The defence raised a reasonable doubt on the prosecution's case by adducing credible, consistent evidence and circumscribing circumstances (presence of intermediary, complainant's conduct, FIR and subsequent invitation for treatment) that supported consent or at least undermined proof of criminal intent; therefore prosecution failed to prove s.354 beyond reasonable doubt and accused is acquitted.

  • 29 Jul 2025

    Hamizal Bin Osman

    Citation
    BA-62JS-4-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    BA-62JS-4-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    On maximum evaluation the prosecution proved both elements of rape: that the accused's penis was inserted into the complainant's vagina (penetration) and that the act was without her consent; supporting evidence included the complainant's consistent core account, police reports, corroborating witness testimony about the accused's presence and conduct, and medical findings; defence denial and supporting witnesses failed to raise a reasonable doubt. Accordingly the accused was convicted under Section 376(1) Penal Code and sentenced to 12 years' imprisonment with ancillary police supervision and…

  • 29 Jul 2025

    Hamizal Bin Osman

    Citation
    BA-62JS-4-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    BA-62JS-4-11/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    After maximum evaluation the court accepted the complainant's account of penetration and lack of consent as proved and supported by corroborative evidence (family witnesses, scene photographs, medical findings). Contradictions in statements were minor and did not destroy overall credibility. Defence was uncorroborated denial and failed to raise reasonable doubt. Therefore accused convicted under Section 376(1) Penal Code and sentenced accordingly.

  • 23 Jul 2025

    MUHAMMAD YUSOF BIN MOHAMAD ABDUL RAHMAN

    Citation
    AG-62JS-1-10/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    AG-62JS-1-10/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    The court found the prosecution proved beyond a prima facie and ultimately beyond reasonable doubt the elements of s.376(2): the victim's credible and consistent testimony, corroborating witness accounts, and forensic DNA linking the accused to semen on the rear seat established penetration without consent and immediate prior threats; the accused's sworn denial and explanations were uncorroborated and amounted to a bare denial, failing to raise reasonable doubt; accordingly the accused was convicted and sentenced.

  • 22 Apr 2025

    ZULPANDY BIN RISPEN EFFENDI

    Citation
    BC-62JSK-26-07/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    BC-62JSK-26-07/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Victim gave clear, consistent, detailed and credible testimony of sexual intercourse and penile penetration; hotel booking/receipt and hotel staff identification placed accused alone with victim in room; medical evidence showed hymenal tears consistent with penetration; defence testimony was inconsistent, unsupported and amounted to bare denial that failed to raise reasonable doubt; therefore prosecution proved all elements of Section 376(1) beyond reasonable doubt and conviction is warranted.