1. ) SHERZODBEK ABDULRAKHIM UGLI 2. ) HAJ HAMDAN NURUDDIN FAYEZ SAID 3. ) XXXX

1. ) SHERZODBEK ABDULRAKHIM UGLI 2. ) HAJ HAMDAN NURUDDIN FAYEZ SAID 3. ) XXXX

The court accepted unchallenged expert evidence identifying 512.5g of Cannabis and a continuous chain of custody; proximity and visibility of the drugs in the vehicle established possession and knowledge by accused 3 alone; the statutory presumption of trafficking applied due to weight and the defence failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; prosecution proved a prima facie case against accused 3 beyond reasonable doubt, requiring accused 3 to be convicted and sentenced, while accused 1 and 2 were acquitted for lack of evidence of possession, knowledge or joint intention.

Citation
WA-45A-48-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Sherzodbek Abdulrakhim Ugli; Accused: Haj Hamdan Nuruddin Fayez Said; Accused: Emon Ehsanudddin Ahmed
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 March 2024
Case Number
WA-45A-48-03/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial Drug Trafficking / Judgment and Sentencing (end of Trial)
Outcome
Accused 3 convicted and sentenced; Accused 1 and Accused 2 acquitted and discharged
Legal Topics
Possession, Joint Liability (section 34 Penal Code), Statutory Presumptions Under Dangerous Drugs Act, Chain of Custody, Burden of Proof, Sentencing
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug/narcotics Law Evidence Law Possession Joint Liability (section 34 Penal Code) Statutory Presumptions Under Dangerous Drugs Act Chain of Custody Burden of Proof +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 26 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor

Sherzodbek Abdulrakhim Ugli

Accused

Haj Hamdan Nuruddin Fayez Said

Accused

Emon Ehsanudddin Ahmed

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial Drug Trafficking / Judgment and Sentencing (end of Trial)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the seized substance was a dangerous drug and its quantity
  2. 2 Whether each accused had possession and knowledge of the drug
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumption of trafficking applied and whether it was rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted unchallenged expert evidence identifying 512.5g of Cannabis and a continuous chain of custody; proximity and visibility of the drugs in the vehicle established possession and knowledge by accused 3 alone; the statutory presumption of trafficking applied due to weight and the defence failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; prosecution proved a prima facie case against accused 3 beyond reasonable doubt, requiring accused 3 to be convicted and sentenced, while accused 1 and 2 were acquitted for lack of evidence of possession, knowledge or joint intention.

Court Disposition

Accused 3 convicted and sentenced; Accused 1 and Accused 2 acquitted and discharged

Orders

  • Accused 3 convicted under section 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with section 34 Penal Code
  • Sentence on Accused 3: life imprisonment effective from 23.06.2021