Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Sentencing trends

Legal area

Court

4 Nov 2025

SURENDER A.L TAMIL SELVAM

Citation

JA-45A-19-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

JA-45A-19-02/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that while the accused's guilty plea and cooperation were mitigating, the quantity of cannabis (517.84g, exceeding the 200g threshold) and the public interest in deterrence and sentencing consistency justified a substantial custodial sentence. Having considered sentencing trends and mitigation, the court imposed 7 years 6 months imprisonment from 16-10-2022 and 10 strokes.
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).
4 Aug 2025

Dumpangol Bin Borongkas [ ]

Citation

S-05(H)-102-03/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

S-05(H)-102-03/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court of Appeal held the High Court correctly exercised its sentencing discretion after proper consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors; the 18-year sentence for each appellant is not manifestly excessive or disproportionate and should be affirmed.
9 Jul 2025

1. ) ZULKIFLEE BIN MAT ISA 2. ) HASNAH BINTI ABU HASSAN

Citation

KA-45A-29-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

KA-45A-29-10/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Given the large quantity of methamphetamine (218.5g) attracting a higher sentence, the primacy of public interest and sentencing trends for s12(2) offences, the guilty plea and age of the offender were mitigating but insufficient to reduce the sentence below a substantial term; therefore 15 years imprisonment from date of arrest is appropriate and sebat is excluded due to age.
27 Mar 2024

[Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri] MOHAMAD AZRUL AZLAN BIN MOHAMAD

Citation

PB-45A-12-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PB-45A-12-01/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court accepted accused's voluntary early guilty plea, found him a first offender and likely user, weighed mitigation against public interest and sentencing trends, and held that a sentence of 7 years' imprisonment from date of arrest (21.05.2020) and 10 strokes is lawful, proportionate and appropriate under s12(2) read with s39A(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.
19 Jan 2024

ABA ZARIN BIN ABU BAKAR

Citation

T-09(H)-52-02/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

H
Case number

T-09(H)-52-02/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court found no error in principle by the trial and high courts: they considered public interest, mitigation (including guilty plea), and relevant sentencing trends and authorities; given the 39.02g net weight of methamphetamine and comparative sentences in reported cases, the 9-year imprisonment was not excessive and therefore the appeal is dismissed and the sentence affirmed.
5 Dec 2023

Ithisham Noor Elahi [ ]

Citation

W-05(SH)-267-06/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

W-05(SH)-267-06/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

After applying established appellate principles and weighing aggravating factors (seriousness of offence and loss of life) against mitigating factors (first offender status, prolonged remand ~7 years, age at arrest, family dependents, low income, remorse) and sentencing trends, the Court found the trial judge's 17-year term excessive and substituted a 15-year imprisonment term to run from the date of arrest as the appropriate and proportionate sentence.
24 Jan 2022

PENDAKWARAYA GUNASILAN A/L THENENARASU

Citation

BK – 62RS – 18 – 09/ 2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BK – 62RS – 18 – 09/ 2019 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Court accepted accused's plea as voluntary and informed, weighed mitigation (youth, remorse, first offence) against public interest and deterrence for gang robbery, applied sentencing principles and relevant precedents, and imposed a custodial sentence of five years from arrest date to reflect seriousness while recognizing mitigation.
17 Jan 2022

PENDAKWARAYA MUHAMMAD SUHAIMI KAMARUL BAZLI

Citation

BK – 62RS – 13 – 06/ 2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

BK – 62RS – 13 – 06/ 2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

The court accepted the accused's guilty plea as voluntary and informed, considered mitigating factors (youth, early plea, social report) and aggravating factors (seriousness, public interest, previous conviction), and concluded that deterrence and protection of society required a custodial sentence of three years starting from date of arrest (11.6.2020).
11 Nov 2019

MUSTAZA BIN ABDUL RAHMAN

Citation

W-06A(SH)-2-01/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

W-06A(SH)-2-01/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Convictions for counts 1 and 3 are affirmed because the prosecution proved identity (telco records, seized handset with Telegram account name and preserved chat logs) and proved that the appellant's Telegram posts and online baiah constituted support for a terrorist organisation under the wide definition in s130J; SP7's expert evidence was admissible and persuasive. Conviction under count 2 (failure to report under s130M) is set aside because at the material time no statutory duty in the old Criminal Procedure Code required reporting of the terrorism offences charged and the appellant, a poli…