Roszianayati binti Ahmad

On the judicial record

A High Court judge whose reported corpus concentrates on grave narcotics trials and preventive-detention challenges, with sexual-offence and corruption matters among the range.

Justice Roszianayati binti Ahmad sits in the High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi), and the reported decisions in this corpus are strongly criminal, dominated by serious narcotics trials and preventive-detention challenges, with many judgments written in Bahasa Malaysia. Drug-trafficking trials under seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952) recur across the docket, frequently on charges of trafficking in methamphetamine, and read where relevant with possession charges under seksyen 12(2) and seksyen 12(3). The judgments work closely through the arrest and recovery evidence — for example house keys seized from a car leading to drugs found in luggage, or boxes of drugs prepared to be posted to Sabah — and the statutory presumptions of possession and knowledge under section 37 of the Act, deciding whether the offence of trafficking is established.

Preventive detention is a distinct strand. Several habeas corpus applications challenge detention or restriction orders made under the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985, raising whether there was non-compliance with the mandatory procedure, whether the investigating and inquiry officers delayed in preparing their reports, and whether the orders were consistent with Article 149 of the Federal Constitution.

The corpus also reaches sexual offences and corruption. Charges under sections 14(a) and 16(1) of the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 and section 377C of the Penal Code come before the court, and a corruption appeal concerns a conviction under section 16(a) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and a question about the authority of the prosecuting officer under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution. Several drug trials involve multiple accused charged jointly, requiring the court to weigh separately whether each had custody, control and knowledge of the drugs. The corpus reflects a High Court judge whose reported work is concentrated in grave criminal trials and the evidential and constitutional safeguards that govern them, with the integrity of the exhibit chain and the correct application of the statutory presumptions the recurring concerns.