Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

Presumption under s37(da) dda

  • 14 Jan 2026

    KHAIRIL SYAMSUL BIN CHE LAH

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

    Prosecution established a prima facie case: chemical analysis certified the exhibits as 180.6g methamphetamine and chain of custody was unbroken; police evidence that accused was holding bag P16 at entry established physical possession and control and, combined with accused's fearful reaction, justified inference of knowledge; s37(da) presumption of trafficking founded on possession supported the prima facie finding; defence narrative was inconsistent and improbable; accordingly accused was ordered to plead, convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment and 12 strokes.

  • 9 Jul 2025

    RAGUNATHAN A/L THANGIAH

    Citation
    J-05(SH)-452-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
    Court
    SH
    Case number
    J-05(SH)-452-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

    The Court upheld the High Court's findings that the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had knowledge, control and possession (constructive possession) of the seized drugs based on direct and circumstantial evidence (keys and access card on appellant, appellant led police to the unit, no other persons in unit, corroborating witness evidence and chemical analysis) and that chain of custody was intact; therefore the prima facie case and statutory presumption where applicable were properly applied and convictions and sentences were affirmed.

  • 12 Oct 2023

    [ ] Saik Siew Chye

    Citation
    WA-45A-33-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
    Court
    High Court
    Case number
    WA-45A-33-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

    The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had the requisite custody, control and knowledge of the drugs; the accused gave a plausible explanation corroborated by evidence (rental by Alex, inspection of contents), investigative failures (failure to trace or call Alex and other material witnesses) and adverse inferences against the prosecution undermined its case; doctrine of wilful blindness did not apply; therefore the presumption of trafficking was rebutted and the accused must be acquitted.

  • 27 Nov 2019

    Muhammad Lukman bin Mohamad

    Citation
    B-05(M)-452-09/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
    Court
    M
    Case number
    B-05(M)-452-09/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

    Charges 1 and 2: convictions and death sentences affirmed because the prosecution proved the presence of Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol and established manufacturing, control and trafficking by credible forensic and circumstantial evidence despite lack of separate quantitative assay; Charge 3: trial judge failed to make an explicit finding whether the s37(da) presumption was rebutted, rendering the trafficking conviction unsafe, therefore conviction under s39B(1)(a) set aside and substituted with possession under s6 punishable under s39A(2), with appellate imposition of 7 years imprisonment fro…