Muhammad Azwan bin Zulkarnai v Pendakwa Raya

Court of Appeal · · Criminal Law

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: This digest provides AI-generated summaries of recent Malaysian legal judgments and is provided for general informational purposes only. The digest may contain errors, omissions, or inaccuracies, and does not constitute legal advice or a substitute for legal counsel. For complete and authoritative information, always consult a qualified legal professional and refer to official court sources (here) or the full text of original judgments. The providers of this digest accept no responsibility or liability for any loss and/or damage resulting from reliance on its contents.

Muhammad Azwan bin Zulkarnai v Pendakwa Raya
CourtCourt of Appeal
Judgment Date21 April 2025
Date Uploaded2 July 2025
Legal TopicsCriminal Law
Parties

Appellant(s): Muhammad Azwan Bin Zulkarnai

Respondent(s):

  • Pendakwa Raya
  • [Pendakwa Raya]
Bench
  • YA Dato' Ahmad Zaidi Bin Ibrahim
  • YA Dato' Azmi Bin Ariffin
  • YA Datuk Noorin binti Badaruddin
Facts & Background
  • The appellant was charged with murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code for shooting the deceased.
  • The High Court found a prima facie case, called for defence, and subsequently convicted the appellant, sentencing him to 30 years imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane.
  • The appellant appealed against the conviction and sentence, primarily relying on the defence of insanity under Section 84 of the Penal Code.
Issues for the Court
  • Whether the High Court erred in rejecting the appellant's defence of insanity under Section 84 of the Penal Code.
  • Whether the psychiatric expert's opinion on "legal insanity" was admissible, or if it was a matter exclusively for the Court to determine.
  • Whether the appellant successfully discharged the burden of proving legal insanity on a balance of probabilities, considering his conduct before, during, and after the incident.
Decision
  • The Court of Appeal affirmed the High Court's decision to reject the defence of insanity, reiterating that the distinction between "medical insanity" and "legal insanity" means only the latter exempts criminal responsibility and is for the Court to decide.
  • The Court found that the appellant failed to prove legal insanity on a balance of probabilities, as his detailed recollection of events and actions (breaking in, retrieving the gun, loading it, targeting the deceased, and fleeing) indicated rational thought and awareness of his actions.
  • The Court concluded that the prosecution had proven its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the conviction and sentence were safe to be upheld, dismissing the appeal.
Link to JudgmentView Full Judgment

Related judgments

📬 Found this useful?

Get daily AI-generated summaries of Malaysian legal judgments from the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal straight to your inbox, free!