Muhammad Nasir, born in September 1990, had a tough childhood. Abandoned by his mother as an infant and raised by his aunt after his parents’ divorce, he dropped out of school in Secondary 3 to support his ill father and help with the family’s shop.

In early 2007, he began working as a bartender at a pub, where he met Aniza Essa and fell deeply in love with her.

By mid‑2007, Aniza Essa—who married Manap in 2001—was trapped in an abusive marriage. Desperate and depressed, she began an affair with Nasir and manipulated him into planning Manap’s murder. She threatened to leave Nasir for a former boyfriend unless he proved his love, which he did by agreeing to kill her husband.

Nasir first attempted to hire a hitman via a friend nicknamed Saigon, but when that failed, he made two attempts himself. On the night of 1 July 2007, he lay in wait outside Manap’s flat with a knife and helmet. When Manap arrived, Nasir stabbed him repeatedly in the neck and chest. One fatal blow caused acute hemorrhage. Manap collapsed, asking, “Apa salah aku pada kau?” (“What wrong have I done to you?”). 

Nasir fled the scene shortly after. Police found the body that same day and arrested both Nasir and Aniza within 48 hours.

On 15 April 2008, Nasir, now 17, stood trial at the High Court. He made a rare guilty plea to murder, allowed since he was under 18 and thus ineligible for the death penalty.

Represented by Subhas Anandan, he offered a heartfelt mitigation: expressing deep remorse, noting his manipulation by Aniza, and stating his only crime was love. Psychiatric evaluation confirmed his regret and emotional turmoil. Justice Kan Ting Chiu sentenced him to indefinite detention under the President’s Pleasure, a protective proviso for minors convicted of capital crimes.

Before Nasir’s trial, Aniza faced the murder charge but pleaded guilty to a reduced offense—culpable homicide not amounting to murder—based on diminished responsibility due to moderate depression from years of abuse. 

On 7 April 2008, Justice Chan Seng Onn handed her a nine‑year prison sentence, noting that despite her role as the mastermind, her mental state and low risk of reoffending justified leniency. The prosecution appealed, seeking life imprisonment, arguing that Nasir's indefinite detention surpassed hers. However, in April 2009, the Court of Appeal upheld the original nine‑year term, citing proper application of sentencing guidelines and her moderate, treatable depression.