This article is based on public news reports up to 30 October 2026. The prosecution's appeal and a civil suit are still before the courts, so we do not comment on the merits of either side. In line with court orders and Section 15 of the Child Act 2001, we do not name the accused or publish anything that could identify him.
In October 2025, a Form Four student was killed at a secondary school in Bandar Utama, Petaling Jaya. The person charged was a 14-year-old schoolmate. In September 2026, the Shah Alam High Court acquitted him on the ground that he was of unsound mind at the time, and ordered him detained for treatment at a psychiatric hospital.
The decision drew strong public reaction. Many people asked how a person who caused a death can be "acquitted". This article explains, in plain terms, the legal rules the court applied and what happens next.
Key Takeaways
- A child under 18 can be charged with murder in Malaysia, but cannot be sentenced to death.
- Under Section 84 of the Penal Code, an act is not an offence if, because of unsoundness of mind, the person could not know what he was doing or that it was wrong.
- The accused must prove this on a balance of probabilities, usually through psychiatric evidence.
- An acquittal on this ground does not mean release. The person is kept in safe custody, here a psychiatric hospital, until the Ruler decides otherwise.
- The prosecution has appealed, and the victim's family has filed a separate civil suit.
What happened
According to police statements and news reports, the incident took place on the morning of 14 October 2025 inside the school. A teacher responded to the student's cries for help, and the boy was detained at the school without resistance. Police seized two knives and recorded statements from more than a hundred witnesses. Police said they found no evidence that the two students had any prior dispute or that bullying was involved.
How the case moved through the courts
- 22 October 2025: the boy was charged with murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code at the Petaling Jaya Magistrate's Court. No plea was recorded, because only the High Court can hear a murder trial.
- Late 2025 to January 2026: he was sent for psychiatric observation and was later found fit to stand trial.
- February 2026: he pleaded not guilty in the Shah Alam High Court.
- August 2026: the trial was held. On 13 August, the court found that the prosecution had proved a prima facie case and called on him to enter his defence. The defence called a consultant forensic psychiatrist.
- 14 September 2026: the High Court acquitted him on the ground of unsoundness of mind and ordered him detained at Hospital Bahagia Ulu Kinta, subject to the pleasure of the Sultan of Selangor.
- Late September 2026: the Attorney-General's Chambers filed an appeal to the Court of Appeal.
- 1 October 2026: the victim's family filed a civil suit in the Kuala Lumpur High Court.
A child charged with murder
Murder under Section 302 of the Penal Code carries the death penalty or imprisonment of 30 to 40 years, together with whipping. For a child, the Child Act 2001 changes this. Section 97 says a person who was under 18 when the offence was committed cannot be sentenced to death. If convicted, the court instead orders that the child be detained at the pleasure of the Ruler.
The Child Act also protects the child's identity. Media and members of the public must not publish a child's name, school, photograph or any detail that could identify a child involved in criminal proceedings. In this case, the court has also made specific orders to protect the boy's identity.
The insanity defence under Section 84
Section 84 of the Penal Code provides that nothing is an offence if, at the time of the act, the person, because of unsoundness of mind, was incapable of knowing the nature of the act, or that what he was doing was wrong or contrary to law.
This is a narrow test. Having a mental illness is not enough. The question is whether the illness took away the person's ability to understand what he was doing, or that it was wrong, at the moment of the act. Under Section 105 of the Evidence Act 1950, the burden is on the accused to prove this. The standard is a balance of probabilities, which is lower than the "beyond reasonable doubt" standard the prosecution must meet.
According to news reports of the written judgment, the court accepted psychiatric evidence that the boy had early-onset schizophrenia with symptoms going back several years, and that he was acting under delusions at the time. The court described this psychiatric evidence as unrebutted. Reports also said the symptoms had earlier been treated as behavioural or discipline problems rather than as a medical condition.
"Acquitted" does not mean "set free"
This is the point most often misunderstood. Under the Criminal Procedure Code, when a person is acquitted because of unsoundness of mind, the court must state whether he committed the act. If he did, the court orders that he be kept in safe custody, and the case is reported to the Ruler or the Yang di-Pertua Negeri, who decides how long the detention lasts.
In this case, the boy remains in a psychiatric hospital for treatment. There is no fixed release date. He stays there until the authorities are satisfied that it is safe for him to return to society.
What happens next
The criminal appeal. The Attorney-General's Chambers has appealed against the acquittal. The Court of Appeal will review whether the High Court was right to accept the insanity defence. As of the date of this article, no hearing date has been reported.
The civil suit. The family has sued the boy, his parents and several government agencies, saying the death could have been prevented if warning signs about the boy's mental health had been acted on. A civil claim is separate from the criminal case. It asks whether anyone owed a duty of care and failed in it, and it is decided on a balance of probabilities. On 22 October 2026, the High Court refused a request to hear the whole civil case behind closed doors, but ordered that nothing identifying the boy may be published.
What parents and schools can take from this
- Take repeated changes in a child's behaviour seriously, especially withdrawal, strange beliefs, or talk about harming others.
- Behaviour that looks like a discipline problem may have a medical cause. A proper assessment by a doctor or psychiatrist can make a difference.
- Report any threat of violence to the school and, where needed, to the police straight away. Keep a record of what was said and when.
- Schools should have a clear process for passing concerns about a student's mental health to parents and to professionals.
If your family is involved in a criminal matter
When a child is arrested or charged, decisions made in the first few days can affect the whole case, including whether a psychiatric assessment is requested. A child has the right to legal representation, and parents or guardians should be involved from the start. If your family needs advice on a criminal matter, you can contact Jack Law Chambers for a confidential first consultation.
Our thoughts are with the family who lost their daughter. This article is general information only and is not legal advice. Every case depends on its own facts; please speak to a lawyer about your situation.
References
The facts in this article come from the public news reports listed below. We have not reviewed the court records. Links open on the publishers’ own websites.
News reports
- Malay Mail (15 October 2025): police to seek remand of the teenage suspect
- The Vibes (October 2025): police record statements from 127 witnesses
- Sinar Daily (22 October 2025): teenager charged with murder at the Petaling Jaya Magistrate’s Court
- Malay Mail (12 February 2026): accused pleads not guilty in the High Court
- The Star (13 August 2026): High Court calls on the accused to enter his defence
- Media Selangor (September 2026): grounds of judgment on the insanity finding
- Malaysiakini (September 2026): prosecution files appeal to the Court of Appeal
- The Star (3 October 2026): victim’s family files civil suit
- Malay Mail (22 October 2026): High Court refuses closed-door hearing of the civil suit
Legislation
- Penal Code: Sections 84 and 302
- Child Act 2001: Sections 15 and 97
- Evidence Act 1950: Section 105
- Criminal Procedure Code: Sections 347 and 348