MOHAMMAD SYAFIQ BIN SHAH DAHLI v Pendakwa Raya

b-05sh-465-10-2024 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 12 May 2025 • B-05(SH)-465-10/2024 • 36 min read

48 cases cited (2 SG, 46 foreign)

Catchwords

s 39B(1)(a) dan boleh dihukum menurut s 39B(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (ADB 1952)-perayu telah didapati bersalah oleh YA HMT-perayu dijatuhi hukuman pemenjaraan seumur hidup dari tarikh ditangkapdan 12 sebatan rotan –perayu merayu ke Mahkamah Rayuan- Mahkamah Rayuan memutuskan sabitan yang diputuskan YA HMT tidak selamat- sabitan dan hukuman yang diputuskan oleh YA HMT diketepikan - OKT dilepas dan dibebaskan daripada pertuduhan. Isu pemilikan barang kes- isu kredibiliti SP5- cabaran terhadap kredibiliti SP5 di peringkat kes pendakwaan- tiada analisis YA HMT terhadap kredibiliti SP5 - keterangan SP5 juga tidak konsisten- isu dapatan YA HMT di akhir kes pendakwaan- nota keterangan YA HMT tidak selari dengan apa yang ditulis oleh YA HMT di dalam alasan penghakiman beliau- isu elemen pengedaran dadah – dalam Alasan Penghakiman, YA HMT mendapati bahawa Pihak Pendakwaan telah membuktikan elemen pengedaran dadah berbahaya menurut s 2 ADB 1952- bercanggah dengan dapatan YA HMT sebelumnya yang mendapati bahawa barang kes telah diserahkan sendiri oleh OKT setelah ditanya SP5- isu dipanggil membela diri dan keterangan pembelaan.

Practice Areas

Judges (3)

Azhahari Kamal bin Ramli Coram Azman bin Abdullah Coram Che Mohd Ruzima bin Ghazali Delivered

Counsel (5)

Nik Ikhwan & Co. Firm Atiqah binti Abdul Karim @ Husaini Counsel Prosecution Dhiya Syazwani Izyan binti Mohd Akhir Counsel Appellant Mohd Riza bin Zakaria Counsel Appellant Nik Mohamed Ikhwan bin Nik Mahamud Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Pendakwa Raya Respondent Mohammad Syafiq bin Shah Dahli Appellant

Case Significance

MOHAMMAD SYAFIQ BIN SHAH DAHLI v Pendakwa Raya is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated May 12, 2025 (citation: b-05sh-465-10-2024). <p>The appellant was convicted of trafficking 237 grams of cannabis seized during a traffic stop on the WCE highway near Kapar, Klang. The Court of Appeal found the conviction unsafe due to credibility issues with the arresting officer SP5, inconsistencies between the trial notes and the grounds of judgment, and errors in the trial judge's evaluation of the defence evidence. The conviction and sentence were set aside and the appellant was acquitted and discharged.</p> The panel comprised Azhahari Kamal bin Ramli, Azman bin Abdullah and Che Mohd Ruzima bin Ghazali, with Che Mohd Ruzima bin Ghazali delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Atiqah binti Abdul Karim @ Husaini (prosecution counsel), Dhiya Syazwani Izyan binti Mohd Akhir (counsel for appellant), Mohd Riza bin Zakaria (counsel for appellant), Nik Mohamed Ikhwan bin Nik Mahamud (counsel for appellant).

Summary

The appellant was convicted of trafficking 237 grams of cannabis seized during a traffic stop on the WCE highway near Kapar, Klang. The Court of Appeal found the conviction unsafe due to credibility issues with the arresting officer SP5, inconsistencies between the trial notes and the grounds of judgment, and errors in the trial judge's evaluation of the defence evidence. The conviction and sentence were set aside and the appellant was acquitted and discharged.

What was the outcome of MOHAMMAD SYAFIQ BIN SHAH DAHLI v Pendakwa Raya?

<p>The appellant was convicted of trafficking 237 grams of cannabis seized during a traffic stop on the WCE highway near Kapar, Klang. The Court of Ap...

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

Cases Cited (48)

SLR (2)

[1994] 2 SLR 257 [1996] 3 SLR 431

UK (4)

[1936] 3 All ER 36 [1944] AC 156 [1947] 1 All ER 582 [1955] AC 370

MY (42)

[1959] 1 MLJ 193 [1961] MLJ 105 [1966] 1 MLJ 209 [1972] 2 MLJ 115 [1980] 2 MLJ 195 [1982] 1 MLJ 194 [1983] 2 MLJ 221 [1984] 2 CLJ 219 [1985] 1 MLJ 38 [1985] 2 MLJ 16 [1985] CLJ 19 [1987] 1 CLJ 250 [1987] 1 MLJ 220 [1987] 1 MLJ 492 [1987] 2 MLJ 336 [1987] CLJ 241 [1987] CLJ 386 [1989] 2 MLJ 33 [1990] 1 CLJ 915 [1990] 2 MLJ 190 [1992] 2 MLJ 56 [1992] 4 CLJ 2086 [1996] 1 CLJ 705 [1996] 2 MLJ 557 [1996] 3 MLJ 560 [1997] 1 CLJ 233 [1999] 4 MLJ 497 [2000] 4 CLJ 649 [2005] 5 MLJ 409 [2009] 2 CLJ 800 [2011] 4 MLJ 694 [2012] 2 CLJ 178 [2014] 3 MLJ 745 [2014] 4 CLJ 133 [2014] 4 CLJ 406 [2015] 1 CLJ 579 [2017] 1 CLJ 617 [2020] 1 CLJ 683 [2021] 7 CLJ 836 [2021] 9 CLJ 523 [2022] 3 CLJ 543 [2022] 6 CLJ 346