Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Knowledge

  • 21 Apr 2026

    UMA SELVAM A/L SUBRAMANIAM

    Citation
    AA-45A-7-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    AA-45A-7-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case: evidence did not prove the accused had possession, custody, control or knowledge of the drugs at either location; section 27 did not operate because police already had the address from the receipt; in absence of proven possession the statutory presumption of trafficking under s37(da) does not arise; accused acquitted.

  • 9 Mar 2026

    KESAVAN A/L MURALI DASS

    Citation
    BL-45A-28-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BL-45A-28-12/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    After full assessment the court found prosecution proved prima facie identity of the drug (cannabis), accused's control and custody of the package, and by operation of s37(d) a presumption of knowledge arose; combined with the large quantity (960.9g) and circumstances (accused alone on the motorcycle, attempt to flee) the proper inference was trafficking; defence failed to rebut the presumption, therefore accused convicted under s39B(1)(a) DDA 1952 and sentenced pursuant to sentencing discretion post-Act 846.

  • 26 Feb 2026

    SUGAN A/L SIVARAMAN

    Citation
    BA-45A-28-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-45A-28-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case because (1) although the seized material was proven cannabis, there was reasonable doubt as to custody, control, ownership and knowledge given credible evidence of a third party's presence and access, conflicting narratives and lack of corroborative witnesses to rebut the defence; therefore the statutory presumption under s37(da)(vi) did not arise and the accused must be released without being called to enter defence.

  • 24 Nov 2025

    1. ) MOHAMAD IZHAM BIN REDZUAN 2. ) NOR SYAZWANA BINTI AHMAD TAMIZI

    Citation
    KA-45A-29-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    KA-45A-29-05/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    On the totality of credible evidence (police contemporaneous conduct, physical possession and handing over of packages by OKT1, hotel registration in OKT2's name, access card found in OKT1's wallet, chemical analysis, and admissible information under s27), the prosecution proved physical control and knowledge of the methamphetamine and joint control of the hotel room; the statutory presumption of distribution was properly raised due to aggregate weight exceeding statutory threshold and the defence failed to rebut on balance of probabilities or raise reasonable doubt; convictions and sentences…

  • 21 Nov 2025

    MUHAIMIN IMAN BIN ROSLI

    Citation
    BA-62D-114-06/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    BA-62D-114-06/2025 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    On the totality of evidence the court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had physical possession, control and knowledge of the drugs: the items were found in the vehicle he was using, in very close proximity to him, his spontaneous reaction supported knowledge, chemical analysis confirmed identity and chain of custody was intact; the defence was an unsupported denial and failed to raise reasonable doubt, therefore conviction followed.

  • 21 Nov 2025

    MUHAIMIN IMAN BIN ROSLI

    Citation
    BA-62D-44-03/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    BA-62D-44-03/2024 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Prosecution proved physical control and knowledge of the dangerous drugs beyond reasonable doubt by evidence of proximity of the drugs to the accused while he was using the vehicle, his spontaneous reaction, positive chemical analysis and unbroken chain of custody; the defence consisted of uncorroborated denials and possibilities which did not raise a reasonable doubt; statutory presumptions applied and accused failed to discharge the evidential burden under s36 ADB; conviction and sentence followed accordingly.

  • 14 Nov 2025

    ARJUNAN A/L CHANDRAN

    Citation
    BL-45A-21-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BL-45A-21-10/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The court found the prosecution proved a prima facie case: accused was alone at scene actively packing cannabis (866.4g) with scales and packaging, chemical analysis confirmed the drug, and statutory presumption under s.37(d) applied; accused failed to rebut on balance of probabilities; thus possession, knowledge and trafficking established and guilty under Section 39B(1)(a) ADB 1952.

  • 26 Oct 2025

    MUHAMMAD AL-NAZIRUL MUBIN BIN MAMAT

    Citation
    TF-83D-461-08/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
    Court
    Magistrates' Court
    Case number
    TF-83D-461-08/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

    Prosecution failed to prove that accused had custody or control and knowledge of the seized drugs because material inconsistencies in witness evidence (notably SP4), uninvestigated third‑party involvement, absence of direct forensic linkage, accessible/unsecured points of entry and investigative deficiencies meant multiple inferences were possible and the mandatory presumption under s.37(d) could not be activated; accordingly no prima facie case existed and accused must be discharged.

  • 23 Oct 2025

    1. ) MUHAMAD FAHRUL FIKRI BIN ISMAIL 2. ) MUHAMMAD SHARIZAL BIN MOHD SHAH

    Citation
    JB-42LB-4-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    JB-42LB-4-12/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The High Court upheld the Sessions Court's finding that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case of custody, control and possession by the respondents because the pondok was accessible to others (no exclusive control), proximity and observed reactions were insufficient to prove knowledge and ownership of the drugs, and therefore the respondents were properly discharged and acquitted.

  • 21 Oct 2025

    1. ) MOHAMAD AMINUDDIN BIN MD ARIFFIN 2. ) FIQRI MUSTAQIM BIN ZAKARIA

    Citation
    BA-45A-132-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    BA-45A-132-09/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    On maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence (chemical analysis, discovery in packed bundles in vehicle under accuseds' control, conduct of accused including flight and refusal to cooperate, corroborative circumstantial factors and recording D29), the court found prosecution proved possession, control and knowledge beyond reasonable doubt and statutory presumption under s.37(da) ADB 1952 applied; accuseds' defences were implausible and mere denials, therefore convicted under s.39B(1)(a) ADB 1952 read with s.39B(2) and s.34 Penal Code.