[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] SHEAGER A/L ADEKKAPACHI

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] SHEAGER A/L ADEKKAPACHI

The court held that the prosecution proved possession beyond reasonable doubt: the accused's admission naming others combined with possession of the car keys and directing police to the vehicle established knowledge, custody and control sufficient for conviction for possession; the presumption of trafficking was not sustained because the accused offered an unrebutted explanation implicating third parties but that explanation did not raise reasonable doubt as to possession, therefore conviction for possession was justified.

Citation
WA-45A-6-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Sheager a/l Adekkapachi
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 January 2026
Case Number
WA-45A-6-01/2024 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial (dangerous Drugs) / Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Accused convicted on both counts for possession of dangerous drugs.
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking Presumption Under DDA, Chain of Custody, Admission and Knowledge, Prima Facie Case, Section 27 Evidence Act
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Sentencing Possession Trafficking Presumption Under DDA Chain of Custody Admission and Knowledge +2 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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Sheager a/l Adekkapachi

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial (dangerous Drugs) / Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved possession, knowledge and control of the drugs by the accused
  2. 2 Whether the presumption of trafficking under section 37(da) of the DDA arises and can be rebutted
  3. 3 Admissibility and credibility of police witnesses and compliance with cautioning procedures (section 37B)

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the prosecution proved possession beyond reasonable doubt: the accused's admission naming others combined with possession of the car keys and directing police to the vehicle established knowledge, custody and control sufficient for conviction for possession; the presumption of trafficking was not sustained because the accused offered an unrebutted explanation implicating third parties but that explanation did not raise reasonable doubt as to possession, therefore conviction for possession was justified.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on both counts for possession of dangerous drugs.

Orders

  • Convicted of possession of heroin (191.7 grams) under section 12(2) DDA punishable under section 39A(2) DDA
  • Convicted of possession of methamphetamine (9.35 grams) under section 12(2) DDA punishable under section 39A(1) DDA