Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Statutory presumptions under dangerous drugs act

Legal area

Court

17 Jul 2025

1. ) Mohd Nazri Bin Mohd Norazmi Segar (Okt 1-meninggal Dunia) 2. ) Shahril Annuar Bin Shahudin

Citation

BA-45A-119-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-119-08/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The prosecution failed to prove beyond a prima facie standard that the accused had custody, control and knowledge of the cannabis found in the backpack; material contradictions between prosecution witnesses and lack of direct or forensic links to the accused meant the statutory presumption under section 37(da) DDA 1952 could not be invoked, therefore the accused was to be acquitted and discharged at the end of the prosecution case.
9 Jul 2025

RAGUNATHAN A/L THANGIAH

Citation

J-05(SH)-451-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

SH
Case number

J-05(SH)-451-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court held the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant had knowledge, control and possession of the drugs by direct and circumstantial evidence (keys and access, appellant led police to unit, absence of others in unit, chemical analysis), the chain of custody and identity of exhibits were preserved, there was no withholding of material evidence to engage s114(g), and the trial judge's credibility findings were not vitiated; accordingly convictions and sentences were affirmed.
3 Jun 2025

MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA

Citation

BA-45-56-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45-56-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found that the prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either accused had exclusive possession, control and knowledge of the drugs because of material inconsistencies on where items were found, gaps in police documentation, unresolved chain of custody issues, absence of key evidence (phones, CCTV, police reports) and credible defence evidence; consequently the statutory presumption under section 37(d) ADB was rebutted and the accused must be acquitted.
3 Jun 2025

MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA

Citation

BA-45A-149-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-149-10/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that either defendant had sole or joint possession, control or knowledge of the seized drugs and failed to maintain a clear, consistent chain of custody and seizure narrative; material inconsistencies about seizure location and failure to produce critical evidence rebutted the statutory presumption and created reasonable doubt, requiring acquittal on the charged counts.
11 Mar 2025

Iun Chung Peng [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Citation

S-05(M)-108-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

M
Case number

S-05(M)-108-03/2022 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The Court upheld conviction because the appellant had actual and continuous physical possession and control of the luggage, unlocked it with the numerical code demonstrating knowledge, and was wilfully blind to the illicit contents; the quantity triggered the statutory presumption of trafficking under DDA s.37(da)(xvi) which the appellant failed to rebut on balance of probabilities; accordingly conviction stands though death sentence was commuted to 30 years imprisonment and 12 strokes.
6 Mar 2025

[Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] YAP KIT SEONG

Citation

BA-45-22-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45-22-02/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court found the prosecution proved identity of the drugs, maintained chain of custody, and established the accused's possession and knowledge by evidence of discovery in the accused's locked room, physical control and DNA linkage; the methamphetamine weight (423.29 g) triggered the statutory presumption of trafficking which the accused failed to rebut given lack of credible supporting evidence for personal consumption; accordingly the accused was convicted and sentenced with discretion exercised under the post‑2023 abolition of mandatory death penalty.
12 Dec 2024

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] GOH HOE CHONG

Citation

WA-45A-14-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45A-14-03/2023 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Court accepted uncontested expert analysis and chain of custody; found OKT3 had knowledge and control because he guided police to hidden packages both at scene and at station; statutory presumptions applied and were not rebutted by OKT3; OKT1's evidence raised reasonable doubt on his knowledge and control (rented car, keys left as arranged, lack of direct link), so prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt as to OKT1; OKT2 had no evidence of possession and was acquitted.
12 Jul 2024

[ ] NORAZLIZAM BIN ABDUL RAHMAN

Citation

PA-45A-51-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-45A-51-09/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of possession because it did not exclude possibility of access by others to the vehicle or establish the accused's knowledge of concealed drugs; contradictions in police evidence and failure to call the registered owner or take all reasonable steps to secure that witness (and to make ID61 admissible) meant no prima facie case was made out; accordingly accused was discharged at close of prosecution.
14 Mar 2024

1. ) SHERZODBEK ABDULRAKHIM UGLI 2. ) HAJ HAMDAN NURUDDIN FAYEZ SAID 3. ) XXXX

Citation

WA-45A-48-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

WA-45A-48-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court accepted unchallenged expert evidence identifying 512.5g of Cannabis and a continuous chain of custody; proximity and visibility of the drugs in the vehicle established possession and knowledge by accused 3 alone; the statutory presumption of trafficking applied due to weight and the defence failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; prosecution proved a prima facie case against accused 3 beyond reasonable doubt, requiring accused 3 to be convicted and sentenced, while accused 1 and 2 were acquitted for lack of evidence of possession, knowledge or joint intention.
30 Jan 2024

BAHTHIAR BIN MOHD SOAD

Citation

JI-83D-699-12/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

JI-83D-699-12/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found the prosecution proved the elements of possession and knowledge beyond reasonable doubt: the drugs were found in a bag held by the accused, the chain of custody was established by seizure and markings, chemical analysis confirmed the drugs, and the statutory presumption under s37(d) applied; the defence's alternative account was mere denial and did not rebut the presumption on balance of probabilities or create reasonable doubt.