Pendakwa Raya v AKMAL HAKIM BIN HADI MUNIR

ja-42jsklba-2-11-2024 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 5 October 2025 • JA-42JSKLB(A)-2-11/2024 • 31 min read
12 cases cited (0 SG, 12 foreign)

Catchwords

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Appeals – Appeal against acquittal – Acquittal at close of defence case – Standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt – Whether prosecution proved case beyond reasonable doubt – Whether defence successfully raised reasonable doubt – Whether trial judge erred in assessment of evidence – Whether appellate court should interfere with trial court's findings on credibility and witness demeanour – Principles of appellate intervention – Whether trial court's findings plainly wrong or against weight of evidence EVIDENCE: Child witnesses – Sexual offences against children – Uncorroborated testimony of child witness – Section 18 of Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 – Section 2D of Evidence Act 1950 (Evidence of Child Witness (Amendment) Act 2024) – Whether conviction may be based on uncorroborated child testimony – Whether child testimony must be "unusually convincing" – Application of prudence rule in child sexual offence cases – Credibility assessment of child witness – Inconsistencies between police report and court testimony – Whether minor inconsistencies constitute material contradictions – Whether differences in detail between concise police report and elaborate court testimony material – Corroboration – Complaint made at first opportunity – Whether complaint to parent constitutes corroboration under Section 157 and Section 8 of Evidence Act 1950 – Whether subsequent withdrawal of complaint affects corroborative value – Absence of supporting evidence from other potential witnesses present at scene – Whether failure to record statements from other students present creates reasonable doubt – Whether absence of supporting evidence in public setting contributes to reasonable doubt – Adverse inference under Section 114(g) of Evidence Act 1950 – Whether adverse inference may be drawn when evidence not obtained versus when evidence withheld or suppressed – Whether witnesses must be material and essential before adverse inference arises CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: Defence – Whether defence must be put to prosecution witnesses during cross-examination – Whether failure to put defence constitutes afterthought – Whether defence not put to prosecution witnesses should be rejected – Application of rule where factual context (COVID-19 protocols) acknowledged by prosecution witness – Taking of judicial notice of facts of public knowledge

Judges (1)

Atan Mustaffa Yussof Ahmad Delivered

Counsel (5)

Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri Johor Firm Rosli Kamaruddin & Co Firm Muhammad Zahier bin Haji Rosli Counsel Respondent Nur Farah Wahida binti Shahudin Counsel Prosecution Rosli Bin Kamaruddin Counsel Respondent

Parties (2)

Pendakwa Raya Appellant Akmal Hakim bin Hadi Munir Respondent

Case Significance

Pendakwa Raya v AKMAL HAKIM BIN HADI MUNIR is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated October 5, 2025 (citation: ja-42jsklba-2-11-2024). The case was decided by Atan Mustaffa Yussof Ahmad.

What was the outcome of Pendakwa Raya v AKMAL HAKIM BIN HADI MUNIR?

Pendakwa Raya v AKMAL HAKIM BIN HADI MUNIR is a High Court decision dated October 5, 2025. The case was heard by Atan Mustaffa Yussof Ahmad. See the full judgment for details.

Statutes Cited

Evidence Act 1950 (Cap 56)
s 133A s 8
Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 (Cap 792)

Cases Cited (12)

UK (1)
[1947] 2 All ER 372
MY (11)
[1971] 2 MLJ 16 [1992] 1 MLJ 137 [2000] 3 CLJ 289 [2005] 4 MLJ 37 [2008] 4 CLJ 631 [2009] 3 CLJ 236 [2013] 2 MLJ 676 [2013] 8 CLJ 359 [2017] MLJU 257 [2021] 2 MLJ 451 [2025] MLJU 1277

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ja-42jsklba-2-11-2024)