PUTRAJAYA (June 15): The Court of Appeal has deferred the hearing of the prosecution’s appeal over Muhammed Yusoff Rawther’s acquittal by the High Court without his defence being called, in relation to his drug trafficking and possession of fake pistols, which was scheduled to be heard on Monday.
A three-member bench chaired by Datuk Azman Abdullah wants the prosecution to exhaust all efforts in handing over the notice of hearing to Yusoff, and has given them three months to do so, following the accused seeking asylum in the UK on humananitarian grounds.
As a result, Azman, who sat with appellate judges Datuk Mohd Radzi Abdul Hamid and Datuk K Muniandy, fixed Sept 8 for mention.
“The bench takes note that the personal notice of the hearing cannot be done, and wants the prosecution to exhaust its efforts to personally deliver the notice.
“The respondent (Yusoff) has also sought asylum based on humanitarian grounds in the UK. The handover of the notice of appeal is a requirement under Section 314 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) and this has to be exhausted.
“The matter for the proceeding to be conducted with the respondent’s attendance via Zoom online proceedings may not be fulfilled unless efforts to serve the personal notice have been exhausted. Following this, the court fixes three months for this matter to be fulfilled, and will decide on it later on Sept 8,” he said.
The bench wants the prosecution, led by deputy public prosecutor Mohd Asnawi Abu Hanifah and DPP Abdul Malik Ayob, to also check with the UK’s Home Ministry over Yusoff’s asylum bid and also update the court on it.
This is despite Yusoff’s counsel Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali informing the bench that they are prepared to deal with the prosecution’s appeal on Monday.
Earlier, DPP Asnawi informed the bench of the prosecution’s predicament of not being able to serve the notice of hearing to Yusoff two weeks ago, after being informed by Rafique that his client is seeking asylum overseas.
When asked by the bench, Asnawi and Rafique agreed that the requirement under Section 314 of the CPC was that there is a requirement for personal service.
“However, this could not be done, as we only knew from the lawyer’s letter dated June 2, that Yusoff is seeking asylum in the UK,” said Asnawi.
“The prosecution has also checked with the Immigration Department and found that Yusoff had left for overseas following the acquittal, and records show that he has yet to return. Hence, we ask for an adjournment of today’s hearing. However, we leave it to the bench [to decide on this],” the DPP said.
Rafique told the bench that Yusoff is seeking asylum in the UK following alleged threats to his safety following the acquittal, and verified that they had received the prosecution’s notice of appeal over the two cases on June 16, 2025.
“Yusoff is aware of the matter, and also of today’s hearing date, and has asked that the appeal proceed, and we are prepared to proceed.”
However, Judge Radzi said that they may have a problem, as the court was bound by an earlier decision in the Gan Boon Aun case, that requires the bench to be satisfied that the notice of hearing could not be served, resulting in the appeal to be dropped.
Exhaust of service needed before proceeding with hearing
Judges Radzi and Muniandy asked both the prosecution and the defence on the interpretation of Section 314 of the CPC, and both parties concurred that the bench must be satisfied that the notice of hearing could not be served, then only could the bench proceed with the hearing.
Section 314 deals with the non-appearance of a respondent, which is, in this case, an accused person, during a criminal appeal, where Subsection (2) stipulates that if the service cannot be effected on the person, the court shall proceed to hear the appeal in his absence.
Last week on June 10, Rafique in a press conference in Kuala Lumpur revealed that Yusoff would not attend Monday’s proceeding as his passport was being held by the UK authorities following his asylum application, and there was therefore no way he could make it back for the appeal.
The lawyer said that Yusoff was fearful for his safety following allegations he had made against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and his former aide Datuk Seri Farhash Wafa Salvador Mubarak Ali, who is also a businessman.
Yusoff was acquitted without his defence being called by High Court judge Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin on June 12 last year, on charges of trafficking of 300.1 grammes of cannabis and possession of fake pistols.
The drug charge under Section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 is punishable under Section 39B(2) of the same Act, which carries a life sentence and also whipping of not less than 12 lashes, if convicted.
For the charge of possession of fake pistols, Yusoff faced a maximum imprisonment term of a year or a maximum fine of up to RM5,000, or both, if found guilty under Section 36(1) of the Arms Act 1960.