Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik

On the court record

Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik appears in the reported corpus as senior criminal-defence counsel, and his reported appearances range across the most serious offences at the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court. In one cluster of Court of Appeal appeals he was engaged in a challenge to convictions for criminal breach of trust and dishonest misappropriation of property under sections 405 and 403 of the Penal Code, coupled with a money-laundering charge under section 4(1)(b) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, the appeal engaging abetment and whether the High Court had correctly found the elements established. His drug-defence work appears in a Court of Appeal appeal argued on a judgment in Bahasa Malaysia, framed under seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952) read with seksyen 34 Kanun Keseksaan (section 34 of the Penal Code), where the issue was sama ada wujud kes prima facie terhadap kedua-dua tertuduh (whether a prima facie case existed against both accused), turning on custody, control and knowledge of the drugs, common intention and an allegation of agent provocateur.

At the apex he was engaged in a Federal Court appeal on the law of murder, where the reported questions concern the burden of proving the three elements under seksyen 300(c) Kanun Keseksaan (section 300(c) of the Penal Code) and, in particular, the meaning of the phrase that an injury be mencukupi pada lazimnya menyebabkan kematian (sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death). Across these reported decisions he appears for accused persons and appellants in trials and appeals raising the gravest charges, and the matters mark him as counsel focused on serious criminal defence, from criminal breach of trust and money laundering to drug trafficking and homicide. Taken as a whole, the reported decisions show counsel arguing the sufficiency of the prosecution's proof at every stage — from the prima-facie threshold at the close of the prosecution case to the appellate re-examination of a conviction — and the fine questions of statutory construction on which the gravest charges can turn.