NIZAMMUL HAYAT BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN v Pendakwa Raya

b-05sh-619-12-2023 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 17 August 2025 • B-05(SH)-619-12/2023 • 19 min read

17 cases cited (0 SG, 17 foreign)

Catchwords

Appeal against conviction and sentence – Section 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 – Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case – Whether custody, control and possession were proven – Whether there was a failure to administer the caution as required under section 37B(1)(b) DDA 1952 – Whether the learned High Court Judge erred in rejecting the evidence of defence witnesses

Practice Areas

Appeal against conviction and sentence

Judges (3)

Azman bin Abdullah Coram Mohamed Zaini bin Mazlan Coram Noorin binti Badaruddin Delivered

Counsel (4)

A M Zaharil & Co. (Petaling Jaya) Firm Dato' Ahmad Zaharil Bin Muhaiyar Counsel Appellant Nurul Syamimi Binti Norazlan Counsel Appellant Siti Rafidah Binti Zainuddin Counsel Prosecution

Parties (2)

Pendakwa Raya Respondent Nizammul Hayat bin Zainal Abidin Appellant

Case Significance

NIZAMMUL HAYAT BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN v Pendakwa Raya is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated August 17, 2025 (citation: b-05sh-619-12-2023). <p>The appellant was convicted of trafficking 320.40 grams of cannabis found at his house in Sungai Besar, Sabak Bernam during a police raid based on intelligence. The key issues were whether the prosecution established custody, control, and possession, and whether the failure to administer caution under s.37B(1)(b) of the DDA vitiated the proceedings. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal, finding the conviction safe and the statutory presumption of trafficking unrebutted.</p> The panel comprised Azman bin Abdullah, Mohamed Zaini bin Mazlan and Noorin binti Badaruddin, with Noorin binti Badaruddin delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Dato' Ahmad Zaharil Bin Muhaiyar (counsel for appellant), Nurul Syamimi Binti Norazlan (counsel for appellant), Siti Rafidah Binti Zainuddin (prosecution counsel).

Summary

The appellant was convicted of trafficking 320.40 grams of cannabis found at his house in Sungai Besar, Sabak Bernam during a police raid based on intelligence. The key issues were whether the prosecution established custody, control, and possession, and whether the failure to administer caution under s.37B(1)(b) of the DDA vitiated the proceedings. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed the appeal, finding the conviction safe and the statutory presumption of trafficking unrebutted.

What was the outcome of NIZAMMUL HAYAT BIN ZAINAL ABIDIN v Pendakwa Raya?

<p>The appellant was convicted of trafficking 320.40 grams of cannabis found at his house in Sungai Besar, Sabak Bernam during a police raid based on ...

Statutes Cited

Criminal Procedure Code

s 15

Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (Cap 234)

s 39B(1)(a)

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)

s 114(g) s 8

Cases Cited (17)

UK (1)

[1969] 2 AC 256

MY (16)

[1956] 22 MLJ 237 [1959] 1 MLJ 193 [1971] 2 MLJ 16 [2005] 6 MLJ 393 [2006] 3 CLJ 597 [2007] 5 CLJ 1 [2009] 1 CLJ 717 [2009] 2 MLJ 194 [2009] 3 CLJ 430 [2009] 6 CLJ 193 [2009] 6 CLJ 420 [2011] 3 CLJ 353 [2013] 4 CLJ 149 [2013] 6 MLJ 741 [2013] MLJU 1592 [2014] 9 CLJ 915