PENDAKWARAYA PENDAWA RAYA KHOR CHEE TATT

PENDAKWARAYA PENDAWA RAYA KHOR CHEE TATT

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because (1) the chemical report and the charge identified the substance as "3,4‑Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDMA)" which does not correspond to any entry in Schedule I of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (the Schedule lists MDMA as 3,4‑Methylenedioxymethamphetamine and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
AA-83D-1657-08/2018 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Khor Chee Tatt
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 August 2019
Case Number
AA-83D-1657-08/2018 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Acquittal (prosecution Appeal)
Outcome
Accused Khor Chee Tatt discharged and acquitted; no need to call defence
Legal Topics
Possession of Dangerous Drugs, Prima Facie Case, Chain of Custody, Chemical Analysis Evidence (section 399 Cpc), Burden of Proof, Schedule I Classification Under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
Criminal Law Narcotics/drug Law Evidence Law Possession of Dangerous Drugs Prima Facie Case Chain of Custody Chemical Analysis Evidence (section 399 Cpc) Burden of Proof +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Khor Chee Tatt

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Acquittal (prosecution Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the seized substance is a dangerous drug listed in Schedule I of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution established a prima facie case at the close of its case
  3. 3 Whether the accused had exclusive possession, custody or control of the drug

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case because (1) the chemical report and the charge identified the substance as "3,4‑Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDMA)" which does not correspond to any entry in Schedule I of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (the Schedule lists MDMA as 3,4‑Methylenedioxymethamphetamine and MDA separately), creating material doubt as to statutory classification; and (2) prosecution failed to exclude the possibility that others had access to the place where the tablets were found, so exclusive possession by the accused was not proven; these failures were fatal and required acquittal.

Court Disposition

Accused Khor Chee Tatt discharged and acquitted; no need to call defence

Orders

  • Accused Khor Chee Tatt released and acquitted without requiring him to enter his defence (discharged and acquitted)