Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Fingerprint evidence

Legal area

Court

5 Aug 2025

Asriyadi Bin Bakri [ ]

Citation

S-05(SH)-464-10/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

S-05(SH)-464-10/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The conviction was upheld because direct eyewitness evidence established physical possession of the package, chain of custody to analysis was intact and uncontested, chemist evidence proved the substance was methamphetamine weighing 64.83 grams, the presumption of trafficking under s37(d) DDA 1952 applied and was not rebutted on the balance of probabilities, and failures to produce a phone, fingerprints or photographs did not amount to suppression of material evidence or undermine the accepted eyewitness testimony.
26 Mar 2025

MOHD FAIZOL BIN MAT AZMIN

Citation

TD-82D-5-11/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

TD-82D-5-11/2022 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case under s.30(3) Poisons Act because material inconsistencies existed regarding where the tablet was found (wallet vs waist bag), the chemical report did not quantify active substance versus tablet weight creating ambiguity as to the charged 0.14g, and late/amending of the charge prejudiced the defence; therefore, after maximum evaluation the evidence did not warrant calling the accused to enter his defence and the accused was acquitted under s.173(h) CPC.
27 Aug 2024

[Pejabat Pengarah Pendakwaan Negeri Kelantan] Mohd Khairu Azharien Bin Ismail

Citation

DJ-83D-1127-09/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DJ-83D-1127-09/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

On maximum evaluation the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had control and knowledge of the methamphetamine (8.50 g) found in plain sight in his vehicle, the chain of custody was intact, defence amounted to bare denial and afterthoughts insufficient to rebut the prima facie case; accused convicted under s39A(1) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and sentenced accordingly.
19 Oct 2023

MOHD IDRIS BIN MOHD SHAFIAI [Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

WA-42S-1-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-42S-1-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court affirmed conviction and sentence because the prosecution proved all essential elements of robbery with a weapon beyond reasonable doubt through credible and positive eyewitness identification, corroborative fingerprint evidence on the victim's vehicle, recovery of exhibits (knife, clothing, image of the chain), positive kawad cam and dock identification, and because appellants failed to raise a credible alibi or comply with statutory/precedential notice requirements; the sentence of 13 years and 3 strokes was within principled range and not manifestly excessive.
19 Oct 2023

IFI IZWAN BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN [Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

WA-42S-2-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-42S-2-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Convictions were upheld because the victim gave credible, positive identification sustained by a 20-minute encounter without face coverings, fingerprint matching of appellant 1 on the victim's car, recovery of the knife and clothing, and the appellants' defences were inconsistent and failed procedural alibi requirements; sentencing was appropriate given the use of a weapon, seriousness of offence, and relevant precedents, therefore appeals against conviction and sentence are dismissed.
21 Sept 2023

[ ] Muhammad Faris Bin Amran

Citation

DD-83D-304-06/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DD-83D-304-06/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court concluded the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had physical custody and control of the heroin found in his right front trouser pocket and had the requisite knowledge; the defence was a bare denial and failed to raise reasonable doubt, therefore conviction under s12(2) ADB 1952 read with s39A(1) followed and the prescribed sentence was imposed.
26 Aug 2022

[ ] Sathiaraj A/l Kundaiah

Citation

BA-45B-12-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45B-12-06/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Objective evidence (post‑mortem showing suffocation, multiple bruises and restraint; fingerprints and CCTV placing accused at scene; DNA linking accused to sexual contact; accused's conduct in gagging, binding, raping and then pawning victim's chain) established that the accused intentionally inflicted injuries which were, in the ordinary course of nature, sufficient to cause death under s.300(c). The intoxication defence failed as it was not proved to meet s.85 requirements. Prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt; conviction for murder (s.302) and death sentence follows.
23 Jun 2022

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] MOHAMAD NAIM SYAFIQ BIN MASURI

Citation

CB-83RS-18-03/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

CB-83RS-18-03/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court convicted because the prosecution established both essential elements of Section 457 read with Section 34: physical entry into the complainant's house and intent to steal. This was proven by reliable witness testimony of co‑offender SP5 corroborated by fingerprint expert P4/P6 linking the accused's prints to items used to store the stolen money; the amended charge was lawful and not prejudicial; the accused's defence was an unsupported afterthought and did not raise a reasonable doubt.
15 Jan 2021

PENDAKWARAYA Public Prosecutor VIKNESWARAN A/L MUTHU KANOPARAH (NO. K/P : 851001-08-6527)

Citation

AH-83D-842-09/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AH-83D-842-09/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The accused was found wearing the bag (P2A) containing the sealed packet of cannabis; chain of custody from seizure to chemical analysis was intact; s.37(d) presumption was properly raised and the defence failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; therefore prosecution proved possession and knowledge and convicted under s.6 ADB 1952 liable to punishment under s.39A(1).
29 Jul 2020

PENDAKWARAYA PENDAKWARAYA SYED 'AFIF FIKRI BIN SYED ABU HUSSIN

Citation

45A-50-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

45A-50-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution failed to prove exclusive possession and knowledge of the accused over the bags containing Cannabis and left material gaps in investigation (notably absence of fingerprint analysis and contradictions in police records), therefore no prima facie case was established and the accused must be acquitted.