Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Exclusion of evidence

Legal area

Court

29 Jan 2026

MOHD NAJIB BIN MOHAMED SIDEK

Citation

JA-41LB(A)-3-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

A
Case number

JA-41LB(A)-3-06/2025 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Even accepting that SP4 held the rank of Sarjan, the urine specimen was taken before any arrest on a DDA charge occurred; the initial arrest was for a commercial offence and the formal DDA arrest was effected only after a positive urine result. That sequence breached s31A(1A), requiring exclusion of the urine bottle and laboratory report; without those exhibits the prosecution could not establish a prima facie case, so the magistrate's acquittal and discharge was correctly affirmed and the appeal is dismissed.
8 Apr 2021

PENDAKWARAYA Muhammad Amirul bin Noor Hashimi MOHD SABRI BIN MOHD RAZALI

Citation

NH-82D-3-09/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

NH-82D-3-09/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Because the urine sample was collected by police officers of rank Corporal (below Sergeant) in breach of section 31A(1A) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, the urine test evidence was excluded; without that evidence the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under section 15(1)(a) and the accused was acquitted without being called to enter defence.