Azhar bin Abdul Hamid

On the judicial record

A High Court judge whose reported corpus is anchored in criminal trials and sentencing, with preventive detention and securities-regulation matters among the range.

Justice Azhar bin Abdul Hamid sits in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi), and the reported decisions in this corpus are strongly criminal, combining full narcotics trials, sentencing decisions and appeals from the subordinate courts. Drug trials under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 recur, requiring the court to decide, on a maximum evaluation of the evidence, whether the prosecution has established a prima facie case beyond a reasonable doubt and whether the accused has raised any reasonable doubt in defence.

Sentencing is a distinctive feature of the corpus. Several judgments set out the court's rationale for the sentence imposed, including a term of imprisonment and whipping on an alternative charge under section 12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 following a plea of guilty, and confirm or vary sentences on appeal from the Sessions Court. The judgments explain the considerations that inform the sentence, including the circumstances of the offence and the plea.

The corpus also engages preventive detention and regulatory crime. A habeas corpus application challenges a two-year detention order made by the Deputy Minister of Home Affairs and the applicant's detention at a rehabilitation centre. A securities appeal concerns a conviction for market manipulation under section 84(1) of the Securities Industry Act 1983, examining the correctness of the conviction and the sentence imposed by the Sessions Court. Several judgments in the corpus are written specifically to explain the court's reasoning after an appeal has been lodged against the sentence, setting out why the term imposed was appropriate on the facts. Across these matters the court gives close attention to the sufficiency of the prosecution's proof, the safety of the conviction, and the proportionality of the sentence. The corpus reflects a High Court judge whose reported work is anchored in the criminal law — its trials, its sentencing, and the constitutional and regulatory questions that surround it — decided on a maximum evaluation of the evidence.