Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Section 34 penal code

Legal area

Court

18 Nov 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) KAMARUDIN BIN ABDULLAH 2. ) NIK ZAIDAH BINTI NIK LONG

Citation

CB-83D-1364-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

CB-83D-1364-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because there was insufficient proof that the items analysed were those seized from the accused: exhibits were not marked or recorded at the scene, multiple contemporaneous arrests and seizures occurred under the same officer, and the prosecution could not exclude the reasonable inference that the submitted exhibits were from other seizures; therefore it was unsafe to call accused to enter defence and they must be discharged.
6 Nov 2025

MOHAMAD FARID BIN MOHAMAD ADZAHA

Citation

AA-62RS-30-08/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

AA-62RS-30-08/2023 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Accused's early guilty plea and personal mitigation warranted credit but were outweighed by the planned nature of the theft, the vulnerability and loss suffered by an elderly victim and public interest in deterrence; accordingly conviction under s.379 read with s.34 is upheld and a fine of RM12,000 with default 8 months imprisonment is proportionate and lawful.
9 Sept 2025

LOGAN A/L NAMASIVAYAM [ ]

Citation

W-05(M)-116-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

W-05(M)-116-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court accepted the prosecution's representation to reduce the charge, found that mitigation and public interest justified substituting the death sentences with convictions under section 299 punishable under section 304(a) read with section 34, and imposed concurrent sentences of twelve years' imprisonment from the date of arrest (17 August 2017).
9 Sept 2025

1. ) XXXX 2. ) DINESWARAN A/L SIVALINGAM [ ]

Citation

W-05(M)-98-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

W-05(M)-98-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court allowed the appeal in part: it accepted the prosecution's representation to reduce the charge to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (conviction entered under section 299 punishable under section 304(a) read with section 34), set aside the death sentences and substituted each with a custodial sentence of twelve years' imprisonment backdated to date of arrest (17 August 2017) after considering the facts, public interest, mitigation and current sentencing trends.
9 Sept 2025

KHANTAN A/L NAMASIVAYAM [ ]

Citation

W-05(M)-117-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

W-05(M)-117-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

With the prosecution's consent to reduce the charge and the appellants' pleas to culpable homicide not amounting to murder (s.304(a) read with s.34), the Court, applying sentencing principles of public interest, mitigation and current sentencing trends, set aside the death sentences and imposed concurrent custodial terms of 12 years' imprisonment from date of arrest (17 August 2017).
3 Jul 2025

Song Chun Ru [TIMBALAN ]

Citation

JB-42S-5-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JB-42S-5-08/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The High Court found the trial judge was entitled to accept PW1 as a credible eyewitness, and PW7's forensic findings corroborated blunt trauma consistent with weapons; on the totality of evidence the offence was properly characterised as culpable homicide not amounting to murder under s.304(b) Penal Code; the prosecution and defence appeals were dismissed and the convictions and sentences (5 years imprisonment each) were upheld.
27 May 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MURUKAN A/L RAMAKRISHNAN 2. ) RAJA SEKAR SELVAM

Citation

W-05(LB)-402-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

LB
Case number

W-05(LB)-402-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Majority held prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case against respondent: SP2's evidence contained significant and unremedied gaps (inconsistent account of forced entry, lack of corroboration, unexplained pink bag, failure to call key witnesses who had access to the unit), and these gaps raised reasonable doubt about possession and possible planting; therefore acquittal by trial judge was correct and appeal dismissed.
14 May 2025

1. ) SITI ASMA BINTI RAMLI 2. ) SAZAIDI BIN SALLEH

Citation

KA-45A-72-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45A-72-12/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Material and unexplained contradictions between the contemporaneous search/unloading list and police testimony created reasonable doubt as to where and how the drugs were seized and who had custody/knowledge; coupled with absence of evidence of a pre-arranged plan or joint intent to distribute, prosecution failed to establish possession, knowledge or joint distribution at the prima facie stage, therefore accused must be discharged.
22 Jan 2025

1. ) ZULKEFFLI BIN MD SAB 2. ) MOHD ALLIF BIN ALIAS

Citation

AA-82D-11-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

AA-82D-11-12/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Although identity of the seized substance as Mitragynine and the chain to the chemist were proved, the prosecution failed to prove that the accused had knowledge of and exclusive control or power of disposal over the substance or that there was joint intention; therefore no prima facie case was made out and the accused must be acquitted at the close of the prosecution case.
6 Jan 2025

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) SURIFKI ARDIANSYAH 2. ) RAMADHAN BIN SOFYANKAYLANI

Citation

CF-83D-798-11/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

CF-83D-798-11/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Balancing mitigation (first offence, early guilty plea, personal circumstances) against public interest and the need for deterrence, the court found a custodial sentence of 48 months imprisonment from date of arrest to be proportionate and appropriate for possession of 2.90g methamphetamine under Section 12(2) ADB read with Section 34 Penal Code.