Malaysian Legal Spotlight: When Fabricating Evidence in Court Crosses into Criminal Territory

 

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. Consult your lawyer for legal advice.

📜 Introduction

In the high-stakes world of Malaysian litigation, the line between aggressive advocacy and outright criminality can blur—especially when it comes to submitting false evidence to the court. The Penal Code of Malaysia (Act 574) makes it clear: fabricating or knowingly using false evidence is not just unethical, it is a crime punishable by imprisonment and fines.

 

⚖️ The Law: Section 193 of the Penal Code

Section 193 states:

 

“Whoever intentionally gives false evidence in any stage of a judicial proceeding, or fabricates false evidence for the purpose of being used in any stage of a judicial proceeding, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine…”

 

Judicial proceedings include trials and investigations directed by law.

 

Punishment: Up to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine.

 

In non-judicial contexts, the punishment is up to three years’ imprisonment and a fine.

 

🧾 Related Provisions in the Penal Code

Fabricating or using false evidence can fall under several sections:

 

Section          Offence         Punishment

s. 192 Fabricating false evidence for judicial proceedings  Up to 7 years + fine

s. 193 Giving or fabricating false evidence with intent to procure conviction or cause injury            Up to 7 years + fine

s. 196 Using evidence known to be false         Same as above

s. 415/420   Cheating (e.g., forged subsale documents to cheat financially)   Up to 7 years + fine

s. 468 Forgery for purpose of cheating Up to 7 years + fine

👩‍⚖️ Lawyers Are Not Immune

Advocates and solicitors are bound by professional ethics, but they are not immune from criminal prosecution.

 

A lawyer who knowingly files a false affidavit or uses fabricated documents can be reported under s. 193, s. 192, s. 196, or s. 468.

 

The Bar’s disciplinary process is separate, but criminal liability applies equally.

 

If the evidence is strong (e.g., clear contradictions in black-and-white documents), the police will open an investigation and refer the matter to the Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) for possible charges.

 

📌 Case Studies

1. Sibu Case (2025)

Accused: Ngang Hock Kung

 

Charge: Submitting documents containing false statements (affidavit, survey plan, service termination) via the E-Kehakiman Sabah & Sarawak system.

 

Court: Sibu Sessions Court, February 7, 2025.

 

Law: Offence under Section 192, punishable under Section 193.

 

Potential Sentence: Up to seven years’ imprisonment and a fine.

 

Source: Sarawak Tribune

 

2. Lawyers in Contempt (2024)

Accused: Lawyers Mark Robin Tallala and G. Mahadeva, with client Jagmohan Singh Sandhu.

 

Offence: Filing a false witness statement.

 

Court’s Finding: The document was knowingly filed, not a mere “mistake.”

 

Judgment: The lawyers ignored the absence of proper witness confirmation and relied solely on client instructions.

 

Source: NST

 

🔎 Why This Matters

Integrity of the justice system depends on truthful evidence.

 

False evidence undermines trust in courts and can lead to wrongful convictions or unjust outcomes.

 

Deterrence: Harsh penalties serve as a warning to litigants and lawyers alike.

 

✅ Conclusion

Fabricating false evidence in Malaysia is not just a breach of ethics—it is a criminal offence under the Penal Code. Whether it is a litigant submitting forged documents or a lawyer knowingly filing false affidavits, the consequences are severe: up to seven years in prison and fines.

 

The message is clear: candour to the tribunal is non-negotiable. When greed or desperation takes over, the courts step in hard to protect the integrity of justice.

 

⚠️ Disclaimer

This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Sources cited via public records and judgments.