Muhammad Nur Arif bin Nur Akil v Pendakwa Raya

Court of Appeal · · Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure

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 Nur Arif bin Nur Akil v Pendakwa Raya
CourtCourt of Appeal
Judgment Date26 May 2025
Date Uploaded3 November 2025
Legal TopicsCriminal Law, Criminal Procedure
Parties

Appellant(s): Muhammad Nur Arif Bin Nur Akil

Respondent(s): Pendakwa Raya

Bench
  • YA Dato' Che Mohd Ruzima Bin Ghazali
  • YA Dato' Collin Lawrence Sequerah
  • YA Dato' Azmi Bin Ariffin
Facts & Background
  • The appellant was charged under Section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (DDA) for trafficking 1900.9 grams of Cannabis, following a police operation at a shopping mall.
  • Police observed the appellant, who attempted to flee, and subsequently apprehended him and found a car key in his possession.
  • A search of the car, which the appellant directed the police to, revealed the dangerous drugs along with the appellant's personal identification documents.
Issues for the Court
  • Whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case of trafficking, specifically proving the appellant's custody, control, and knowledge of the dangerous drugs.
  • Whether the statutory presumption of possession and knowledge under Section 37(d) of the DDA was applicable and had been successfully invoked by the prosecution.
  • Whether the defence's narrative, which introduced other individuals as responsible for the drugs, was credible enough to rebut the prosecution's case and raise a reasonable doubt.
Decision
  • The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appellant's appeal against both conviction and sentence, affirming the High Court's decision.
  • The Court found no error in the High Court's application of the statutory presumption under Section 37(d) DDA, given the evidence of the appellant's control over the car, the presence of his personal items, and the strong smell of cannabis.
  • The Court upheld the High Court's finding that the defence's testimony was incredible and a mere denial, noting the inconsistencies and the failure to provide sufficient information about the alleged third party for investigation.
  • The Court also affirmed the sentence, ruling that the High Court had correctly exercised its discretion under Section 54 of the Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty Act 2023 in imposing 30 years imprisonment and 12 strokes of the cane.
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!