Reported Cases

  • High Court, Kuala Lumpur Parties to the Suit: Appellant: Public Prosecutor Respondent: Syed Saddiq bin Syed Abdul Rahman Case Type: Criminal Trial Relevant Provisions: Penal Code, specifically Section 406 (Criminal Breach of Trust) read with Section 109 (Abetment), Section 403 (Dishonest Misappropriation of Property). Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Act 613), specifically Section 4(1)(b). Overview of the Case: The accused, Syed Saddiq, was initially found guilty by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on four charges: abetting criminal breach of trust (CBT) of RM1 million, misappropriation of RM120,000, and two counts of money laundering involving......

    25 August, 2025

  • High Court, Johor Bahru Parties to the Suit: Plaintiff: Public Prosecutor Defendant: Thiruselvan Richard a/l Balakrishnan Case Type: Criminal Overview of the Case: Police, acting on a tip-off, raided a two-story house. The house was empty and locked when they arrived. After breaking in and securing the premises, three men, including the accused, were arrested as they arrived at the house. A search of an upstairs bedroom, which was unlocked, yielded several packages of dangerous drugs (heroin and methamphetamine) and a large amount of cash. The accused was charged with drug trafficking. At the end of the prosecution’s case, the......

    17 August, 2019

  • High Court, Muar Parties to the Suit: Plaintiff: Public Prosecutor Defendants: 2 unnamed accused Relevant Provisions: This case involved a criminal prosecution under the Penal Code and the Evidence Act 1950, specifically, Section 302 of the Penal Code, Section 34 of the Penal Code, Section 26 of the Evidence Act 1950 and Section 6 of the Evidence Act 1950 Overview of the Case The first and second accused were charged with the murder of a child, Paris Lim Yunn Jia, under Sections 302 and 34 of the Penal Code. The child’s mother had left the child in the care of......

    17 August, 2019

  • Federal Court, Putrajaya Parties to the Suit: Plaintiff: Public Prosecutor Defendant: Azmi bin Sharom Case Type: Criminal Reference Relevant Provisions: This case centered on a direct challenge to the Sedition Act 1948 and its relationship with the Federal Constitution, specifically, Article 10(1)(a), Article 10(2)(a), Article 162(1) and Article 4(1) Overview of the Case: The Defendant, a law professor, was charged under the Sedition Act for two statements. Before his trial began, he challenged the constitutionality of the Act itself. He argued that the Sedition Act was a pre-Merdeka law, not one passed by the Malaysian Parliament. As a result, he......

    17 August, 2019

  • Court of Appeal, Putrajaya Parties to the Suit: Appellants: Ho Kok Leong (First Appellant) and Soo Yoke Sin (Second Appellant) Respondent: Public Prosecutor Case Type: Criminal Appeal Relevant Provisions: This case centered on the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (“DDA 1952”), specifically Section 39B(1)(a) and Section 37(da) Overview of the Case: The Appellants, a husband and wife, were arrested after police, acting on a tip-off, found a significant quantity of dangerous drugs (Heroin, Monoacetylmorphines, and Methamphetamine) in their car. They were charged with two counts of drug trafficking and one count of drug possession. The trial court, after finding that a......

    15 July, 2019

  • High Court, Kuala Lumpur Parties to the Suit: Appellant: Haris Fathillah bin Mohamed Ibrahim Respondent: Public Prosecutor Case Type: Criminal Appeal Relevant Provisions: This case centered on the interpretation and application of the Sedition Act 1948 (Act 15), specifically, Section 4(1)(b), Section 3(1) and Section 3(3). Overview of the Case: The Appellant, a public speaker, was charged in the Sessions Court with uttering seditious words during a public forum. The speech in question, delivered after the 13th General Election, included calls for people to “go down to the streets and take back Putrajaya.” The Sessions Court found the Appellant guilty......

    15 July, 2019

  • High Court, Shah Alam Parties to the Suit: Appellant: Public Prosecutor Respondent: Badrul Hisham bin Shaharin Case Type: Criminal Appeal Relevant Provisions: Peaceful Assembly Act 2009 specifically Section 9(1), Section 3, Section 19 Overview of the Case: The Respondent, Badrul Hisham bin Shaharin, was charged in the Sessions Court with failing to provide the required 10-day notice for a public assembly, in violation of Section 9(1) of the Act. The Sessions Court acquitted the Respondent after finding that the prosecution had failed to prove the most critical element of the charge: that the Respondent was, in fact, the organiser. This......

    15 July, 2019

  • High Court, Kuala Lumpur Parties to the Suit: Appellant: Mohd Rafizi bin Ramli Respondent: Public Prosecutor Case Type: Criminal Appeal Relevant Provisions: Sections 8(1)(c)(iii) and 8(1)(c)(iv) of the Official Secrets Act 1972 Overview of the Case This was a criminal appeal to the High Court against a conviction and sentence handed down by the Sessions Court. The appellant, Mohd Rafizi bin Ramli, was found guilty of two charges under the Official Secrets Act 1972 (OSA) related to page 98 of the 1MDB Audit Report, which had been classified as an official secret. He was sentenced to 18 months of imprisonment......

    15 July, 2019

  • Federal Court, Putrajaya Parties to the Suit: Appellants: Jaideep Singh Dalip Singh and others Respondents: ASP Mahathir Abdullah Sapawi & Ors Case Type: Criminal Appeals Relevant Provisions: Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA), specifically Section 4(1)(a) and 4(2)(ii). The case also heavily involves Article 5(4) of the Federal Constitution and the common law principle of habeas corpus. Overview of the Case The case of Jaideep Singh Dalip Singh v ASP Mahathir Abdullah Sapawi & Ors centered on a legal challenge to the detention of several individuals under the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA). The appellants had been remanded by......

    15 July, 2019

  • High Court, Kuala Lumpur Parties to the Suit: Applicant: Mohamad Shahid bin Ahmad Respondents: Dato’ Mohamad Fazin bin Mahmud, Timbalan Pengerusi, Lembaga Pencegahan Jenayah & Ors Case Type: Civil Litigation (Judicial Review) Relevant Provisions: Prevention of Crimes Act 1959 (PCA), specifically sections 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 15. The case’s core legal arguments centered on Section 15(1) of the PCA. Overview of the Case The case of Mohamad Shahid bin Ahmad v Dato’ Mohamad Fazin bin Mahmud, Timbalan Pengerusi, Lembaga Pencegahan Jenayah & Ors was an application for judicial review filed by the applicant against the Board......

    15 July, 2019

  • Court of Appeal, Putrajaya Parties to the Suit: Appellant: Karpal Singh a/l Ram Singh Respondent: Public Prosecutor Case Type: Criminal Appeal Relevant Provisions: Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act 1948 Overview of the Case The case of Karpal Singh a/l Ram Singh v Public Prosecutor was a criminal appeal that focused on the sentence imposed for an offence under the Sedition Act. The appellant, a prominent lawyer and Member of Parliament, was convicted under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act 1948 and was fined RM4,000. The core issue of the appeal was not the conviction itself, but the severity of......

    15 July, 2019

  • Federal Court, Putrajaya Parties to the Suit: Appellant: Dato’ Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim Respondent: Public Prosecutor Case Type: Criminal Appeal Relevant Provisions: Section 377B of the Penal Code Overview of the Case The case was a criminal appeal that drew immense public and political attention. It involved a charge of sodomy against Dato’ Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim, a prominent Malaysian political figure. The prosecution’s case was built on the testimony of a key witness and forensic evidence, including DNA found at the scene. The High Court initially acquitted the appellant, finding that the integrity of the DNA samples had been......

    15 July, 2019