[Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri] 1. ) Mr Sah Hanaosuk 2. ) Mr. Sontaya Labaidae

[Pejabat Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri] 1. ) Mr Sah Hanaosuk 2. ) Mr. Sontaya Labaidae

Court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the seized substance was 762.64 grams of Methamphetamine (chemical reports), that OKT1 physically removed and held the packaged exhibits and both accused were jointly present in the vehicle and attempted to flee on identification by police; proper marking, custody and transfer to Chemistry Department established chain of custody; these facts supported possession and knowledge and raised the statutory presumption of distribution under perenggan 37(da)(xvi) ADB 1952 which defence failed to rebut on balance of probabilities, and therefore conviction under perenggan 39B(1)(a) ADB 1952 read with subsection 39B(2) and s34 Penal Code...

Citation
KA-45A-43-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused (okt1): Mr Sah Hanaosuk; Accused (okt2): Mr Sontaya Labaidae
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
5 March 2025
Case Number
KA-45A-43-06/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Trafficking / Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Convicted
Legal Topics
Possession, Knowledge, Drug Trafficking/distribution, Common Intention (section 34), Prima Facie Case, Chain of Custody, Adverse Inference, Sentencing Discretion (act 846)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Procedure Possession Knowledge Drug Trafficking/distribution Common Intention (section 34) +4 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 8 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Mr Sah Hanaosuk

Accused (okt1)

Mr Sontaya Labaidae

Accused (okt2)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Trafficking / Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved prima facie offence of trafficking methamphetamine under perenggan 39B(1)(a) ADB 1952 read with subsection 39B(2) and s34 Penal Code
  2. 2 Whether accused had possession (custody/control) and knowledge of the drugs
  3. 3 Whether there was common intention/joint intent to distribute

Ratio Decidendi

Court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the seized substance was 762.64 grams of Methamphetamine (chemical reports), that OKT1 physically removed and held the packaged exhibits and both accused were jointly present in the vehicle and attempted to flee on identification by police; proper marking, custody and transfer to Chemistry Department established chain of custody; these facts supported possession and knowledge and raised the statutory presumption of distribution under perenggan 37(da)(xvi) ADB 1952 which defence failed to rebut on balance of probabilities, and therefore conviction under perenggan 39B(1)(a) ADB 1952 read with subsection 39B(2) and s34 Penal Code...

Court Disposition

Convicted

Orders

  • OKT1 (Mr Sah Hanaosuk): Convicted under perenggan 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with subsection 39B(2) and section 34 Penal Code; sentenced to life imprisonment (treated as 30 years) commencing from date of arrest and 12 strokes.
  • OKT2 (Mr Sontaya Labaidae): Convicted under perenggan 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with subsection 39B(2) and section 34 Penal Code; sentenced to life imprisonment (treated as 30 years) commencing from date of arrest and 12 strokes.