Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Joint liability (s34 penal code)

Legal area

Court

3 Jun 2025

MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA

Citation

BA-45-54-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45-54-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court acquitted both accused because prosecution did not prove possession, control and knowledge beyond reasonable doubt: the location of seizure was unclear, charges were imprecise, there were significant gaps in investigation and chain of custody, material witnesses and evidence (phones, CCTV, clothing) were not produced, and forensic/fingerprint evidence did not link the accused; the defence successfully rebutted the statutory presumption under s37(d) ADB on balance of probabilities.
26 Sept 2023

Muhammad Azizul Hakim Bin Hasnan [Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM)]

Citation

AA-42(R)(A)-2-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

R
Case number

AA-42(R)(A)-2-06/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The Court found the prosecution adduced sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of receiving gratification under s16(a)(B) ASPRM, the presumption under s50(1) arose and was not rebutted on the balance of probabilities by the appellants, material witness evidence was credible and corroborative, and the Sessions Court did not err in convicting and sentencing; appeal dismissed and convictions and sentences upheld.
31 Mar 2023

1. ) KARIKAALAN A/L MUNIANDY 2. ) KARTEIK A/L PECHI

Citation

AB-83-669-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AB-83-669-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Material inconsistencies and gaps in prosecution evidence (contradictory accounts of where and when arrest occurred, who requested identity documents, and failure to call a key eyewitness) undermined the prima facie case; the accused's consistent sworn evidence raised reasonable doubt on elements of both offences, therefore prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and accused must be acquitted.
20 Jan 2023

[ ] 1. ) Yap Yee Meng 2. ) Miss Tanyaporn Kakham

Citation

BA-45A-36-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-36-05/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court convicted the first accused on possession counts where circumstantial evidence combined with chemical analysis and the s37(d) presumption established possession and knowledge (drugs in P25 inside toilet). The court acquitted the first accused on counts relating to drugs found on the roof because inconsistencies in prosecution photographs and the defence explanation raised reasonable doubt sufficient to rebut the s37(d) presumption. The second accused was acquitted on all counts because prosecution failed to prove possession, control or knowledge and could not establish joint intent…

Malaysia Case Law

MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA

Muhammad Azizul Hakim Bin Hasnan [Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM)]

1. ) KARIKAALAN A/L MUNIANDY 2. ) KARTEIK A/L PECHI

[ ] 1. ) Yap Yee Meng 2. ) Miss Tanyaporn Kakham