/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2019/11/f9023d9fbcb61a3c740c6e5fdba171ab.jpg)
Court acquits teen of Bandar Utama schoolgirl murder charge on insanity grounds
The High Court today acquitted and discharged a 15-year-old boy of the charge of murdering a female student at a secondary school in Bandar Utama, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, last year after finding that he was of unsound mind at the time of the incident.
Judge Adlin Abdul Majid also ordered the teenager to be detained at Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta, Perak, from today for a period to be approved by the sultan of Selangor.
The teenager’s lawyer, Kitson Foong, said the court found...
The High Court today acquitted and discharged a 15-year-old boy of the charge of murdering a female student at a secondary school in Bandar Utama, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, last year after finding that he was of unsound mind at the time of the incident.
Judge Adlin Abdul Majid also ordered the teenager to be detained at Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta, Perak, from today for a period to be approved by the sultan of Selangor.
The teenager’s lawyer, Kitson Foong, said the court found that his client was of unsound mind at the time of the incident, resulting in a finding of legal insanity under Section 84 of the Penal Code.
“The respondent was found to be of unsound mind at the hour, date, and time of the incident in October (2025). Accordingly, the defence successfully raised Section 84 of the Penal Code. The court recorded an acquittal on the ground of insanity,” he told reporters outside the court after proceedings.
Foong said the court accepted the testimony of Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta consultant forensic psychiatrist Dr Ian Lloyd Anthony, who confirmed that the teenager was suffering from severe and aggressive schizophrenia.
“The schizophrenia caused him to lose his sense of self. He believed he was a god. He said he heard voices and instructions from someone. The prosecution did not dispute this,” he said.
Foong said the teenager would now undergo treatment for the disorder, adding that his recovery would take time.
He said the judge had reminded the teenager to recognise that his actions had resulted in the loss of a life and to be grateful for the second chance he had been given.
During the trial, the prosecution called 11 witnesses, while the defence called two, including the teenager himself.
Not guilty plea
The teenager was accused of murdering his schoolmate in a female students’ toilet at a national secondary school in Bandar Utama between 9.20am and 9.35am on Oct 14, 2025.
He was charged under Section 302 of the Penal Code, which provides for the death penalty or imprisonment of between 30 and 40 years, with up to 12 strokes of the cane if the death penalty is not imposed.
However, Section 97(1) of the Child Act 2001 prohibits the death penalty from being imposed on anyone under 18.
Instead, under Section 97(2), the court may order the person to be detained for a period approved by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the ruler, or Yang di-Pertua Negeri.
Deputy public prosecutors Raja Zaizul Faridah Raja Zaharudin, Aqharie Durranie Aziz, and Ahmad Iqbal Azman appeared for the prosecution.
As the teenager is a minor, his identity and photograph cannot be disclosed. The proceedings were conducted in closed court.
On Feb 12, 2026, the teenager pleaded not guilty after the charge was read to him again in Mandarin before Adlin.
/file/1005/ed0ab83aceeee13ddaee718d6b486654.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2022/01/257402438a5fb216f62b7ed8a33e52f3.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2024/06/736c21462382947f5c0ec3618da34267.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2024/03/165700d238c148e889dd839fef70725b.jpg)
I find that there is not much difference whether he is found guilty or not. There is no more Death Penalty in Malaysia. Detained at Hospital Bahagia at the pleasure of the Sultan of Selangor has got no time set. For how long we do not know ?
So now we are told that a boy of unsound mind had been placed in a mainstream school and left to struggle until his insanity led to such deadly consequences. Nobody turns unsound all of a sudden. How long wa he like this? How was such a violent and aggressive young boy of unsound mind not diagnosed and given help early? The family needs to answer this as does the school. If he was schizophrenic, the family members would have have seen this abnormal behaviour. So what steps did they take to help him. With such patients, it is not harsh punishment that is needed. It is specialist care. What care did he receive? What special attention or regimen did the parents ensure to provide structure and support for this boy? The next most important institution after the family is the school. Teachers and principals are perfectly capable of identifying irregular behavioural traits in students. What measures were taken to address this? Did they give him extra attention? Did they seek out his parents to express concerns about his behaviour, his performance in his studies, the need for specialist care and attention? If they failed these minimum steps, it was professional neglect of a student and endangerment of other children. A detailed scrutiny of this case is urgent. We do not know how many more families are sending out such children who will be a threat to society. We do not know how many more apathetic schools are ignoring such struggling children, especially those in Remove classes and so on and thereby creating violent conditions in schools. The ministry, the district offices and all institutions relating to education need to take responsibility.
The verdict is confusing. Should not the boy be found guilty but acting from unsound mind or temporary loss of sanity? After all he was found to be fit to stand trial. He killed the girl, acquittal means he did not kill?
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.