1. ) LIM CHIN LIANG 2. ) XXXX

1. ) LIM CHIN LIANG 2. ) XXXX

Given the serious nature of drug possession, the lack of family supervision and support, the child's exposure to unsuitable environment and adults, and the public interest in deterrence and denunciation, the court exercised its statutory power under s.91(1)(f) Child Act 2001 to order that the child (T) be sent to Sekolah Tunas Bakti for two years; the court declined the Good Behaviour Bond recommendation because a bond would be ineffective absent adequate family supervision and would not satisfy public interest in prevention and denunciation, and the guilty plea did not warrant substantial mitigation in these circumstances.

Citation
JG-83D-849-12/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Lim Chin Liang; Accused: M (Kanak-Kanak 1); Accused (child): T (Kanak-Kanak 2); Accused: A (Kanak-Kanak 3); Accused: L (Kanak-Kanak 4)
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 April 2025
Case Number
JG-83D-849-12/2024 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
Child T (Kanak-Kanak 2) convicted of possession of Ketamine under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.12(3) and s.34 Penal Code and ordered to be sent to Sekolah Tunas Bakti for 2 years under s.91(1)(f) Child Act 2001.
Legal Topics
Possession of Controlled Drugs, Sentencing, Juvenile Rehabilitation, Guilty Plea Credit, Public Interest and Deterrence, Statutory Powers Under Child Act 2001
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Juvenile Law Drug Offences Possession of Controlled Drugs Sentencing Juvenile Rehabilitation Guilty Plea Credit Public Interest and Deterrence +1 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor

Lim Chin Liang

Accused

M (Kanak-Kanak 1)

Accused

T (Kanak-Kanak 2)

Accused (child)

A (Kanak-Kanak 3)

Accused

L (Kanak-Kanak 4)

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to impose custodial rehabilitation under s.91(1)(f) Child Act 2001 for a child convicted of possession of Ketamine
  2. 2 Appropriate disposition for possession under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.12(3) and s.34 Penal Code
  3. 3 Whether an early guilty plea merits mitigation given absence of any defence and public interest

Ratio Decidendi

Given the serious nature of drug possession, the lack of family supervision and support, the child's exposure to unsuitable environment and adults, and the public interest in deterrence and denunciation, the court exercised its statutory power under s.91(1)(f) Child Act 2001 to order that the child (T) be sent to Sekolah Tunas Bakti for two years; the court declined the Good Behaviour Bond recommendation because a bond would be ineffective absent adequate family supervision and would not satisfy public interest in prevention and denunciation, and the guilty plea did not warrant substantial mitigation in these circumstances.

Court Disposition

Child T (Kanak-Kanak 2) convicted of possession of Ketamine under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.12(3) and s.34 Penal Code and ordered to be sent to Sekolah Tunas Bakti for 2 years under s.91(1)(f) Child Act 2001.

Orders

  • Convicted of possession of Ketamine under s.12(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 read with s.12(3) and s.34 Penal Code
  • Order that T (Kanak-Kanak 2) be sent to Sekolah Tunas Bakti for 2 years under s.91(1)(f) Child Act 2001