JAAYENDIRAN A/L KUMARESAN

JAAYENDIRAN A/L KUMARESAN

Prosecution proved chain of custody and chemist analysis of 0.90g heroin/mono‑acetylmorphine; accused was found to have custody/control of the container (he took the packet from his pocket and surrendered it); s.37(d) presumption therefore applied and the accused failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities, warranting conviction under s.12(2) DDA 1952 and sentence under s.12(3).

Citation
BL-83D-588-04/2018 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Jaayendiran A/L Kumaresan
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 September 2019
Case Number
BL-83D-588-04/2018 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Drugs Act Offence / Trial Judgment and Sentencing (magistrate Court)
Outcome
Guilty; convicted under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and punishable under s.12(3); sentenced to 4 months imprisonment from 25/09/2019; stay of execution pending appeal granted.
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Drugs, Statutory Presumption Under S.37(d) DDA 1952, Chain of Custody of Exhibits, Burden of Proof and Shifting on Rebuttal, Credibility of Witnesses, Recall of Witnesses Under S.425 CPC, Stay of Execution Pending Appeal
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Procedural Law Possession of Controlled Drugs Statutory Presumption Under S.37(d) DDA 1952 Chain of Custody of Exhibits Burden of Proof and Shifting on Rebuttal +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 6 Authorities cited 35 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Jaayendiran A/L Kumaresan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Drugs Act Offence / Trial Judgment and Sentencing (magistrate Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused had custody or control of the container holding the drugs
  2. 2 Whether statutory presumption under s.37(d) DDA 1952 was properly invoked
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution proved identity and weight of the drugs beyond reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution proved chain of custody and chemist analysis of 0.90g heroin/mono‑acetylmorphine; accused was found to have custody/control of the container (he took the packet from his pocket and surrendered it); s.37(d) presumption therefore applied and the accused failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities, warranting conviction under s.12(2) DDA 1952 and sentence under s.12(3).

Court Disposition

Guilty; convicted under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and punishable under s.12(3); sentenced to 4 months imprisonment from 25/09/2019; stay of execution pending appeal granted.

Orders

  • Convicted under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  • Sentenced to 4 months imprisonment commencing 25/09/2019