RAGUNATHAN A/L THANGIAH

RAGUNATHAN A/L THANGIAH

Court held prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that appellant had knowledge, custody and control of the drugs based on keys and access found on him, his conduct in leading police to the unit and corroborative witness and chemical analysis; chain of custody was not broken and absence of CCTV/forensic prints was not fatal; failure to call other detained persons did not attract s114(g) as they were not material; convictions and sentences upheld.

Citation
J-05(SH)-453-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/perayu: Ragunathan a/l Thangiah; Respondent/pendakwa Raya: Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)
Court
SH
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 July 2025
Case Number
J-05(SH)-453-09/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (dangerous Drugs) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Heard and Decided)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences of the High Court are confirmed.
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Constructive Possession, Chain of Custody, Statutory Presumption S37(da) DDA 1952, Adverse Inference S114(g) Evidence Act 1950
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics Law Evidence Law Appellate Review Possession Trafficking Constructive Possession Chain of Custody +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 4 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ragunathan a/l Thangiah

Appellant/perayu

Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)

Respondent/pendakwa Raya

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (dangerous Drugs) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Heard and Decided)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved a prima facie case of trafficking/possession
  2. 2 Whether appellant had knowledge, custody, control and ownership of the drugs
  3. 3 Whether the chain of custody of exhibits was broken by delay

Ratio Decidendi

Court held prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that appellant had knowledge, custody and control of the drugs based on keys and access found on him, his conduct in leading police to the unit and corroborative witness and chemical analysis; chain of custody was not broken and absence of CCTV/forensic prints was not fatal; failure to call other detained persons did not attract s114(g) as they were not material; convictions and sentences upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences of the High Court are confirmed.

Orders

  • Appeals in J-05(SH)-451-09/2024, J-05(SH)-452-09/2024 and J-05(SH)-453-09/2024 dismissed
  • Convictions and sentences of the High Court are affirmed