PENDAKWARAYA Pejabat Timbalan Pendakwaraya negeri Selangor Jaayendiran a/l Kumaresan

PENDAKWARAYA Pejabat Timbalan Pendakwaraya negeri Selangor Jaayendiran a/l Kumaresan

The court accepted the chemist's analysis and found the prosecution proved chain of custody and that the accused had custody/control of the container; the s.37(d) presumption therefore arose and the accused failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; accordingly the accused was guilty of possession of 0.90g heroin/mono‑acetylmorphine under s.12(2) DDA 1952 and punishable under s.12(3).

Citation
83d-588-04/2018 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Jaayendiran a/l Kumaresan
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 September 2019
Case Number
83d-588-04/2018 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Dangerous Drugs (possession) / Trial Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
Accused convicted
Legal Topics
Possession, Statutory Presumption S.37(d) DDA 1952, Chain of Custody, Burden of Proof, Credibility of Witnesses, Recall of Witnesses S.425 CPC, Sentencing and Stay Pending Appeal
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics/drug Law Evidence Law Procedure Possession Statutory Presumption S.37(d) DDA 1952 Chain of Custody Burden of Proof +3 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 24 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Jaayendiran a/l Kumaresan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Dangerous Drugs (possession) / Trial Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved possession and knowledge of the drugs beyond reasonable doubt or whether statutory presumption under s.37(d) DDA 1952 applied
  2. 2 Whether chain of custody and identity of the drug exhibits were sufficiently established
  3. 3 Whether the accused rebutted the presumption of possession on balance of probabilities by alleging police planting and failure to investigate reports

Ratio Decidendi

The court accepted the chemist's analysis and found the prosecution proved chain of custody and that the accused had custody/control of the container; the s.37(d) presumption therefore arose and the accused failed to rebut it on the balance of probabilities; accordingly the accused was guilty of possession of 0.90g heroin/mono‑acetylmorphine under s.12(2) DDA 1952 and punishable under s.12(3).

Court Disposition

Accused convicted

Orders

  • Convicted under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 for possession of 0.90 gram heroin and mono‑acetylmorphine
  • Sentenced to 4 months imprisonment commencing 25/09/2019