PENDAKWARAYA Firdaus bin Zainol (No. K/P: 830504-07-5237)

PENDAKWARAYA Firdaus bin Zainol (No. K/P: 830504-07-5237)

Prosecution failed to prove custody or exclusive control of the drugs and did not call key eyewitnesses whose evidence could have filled the gap; therefore the presumption under s37(d) DDA 1952 did not arise and reasonable doubt remained, requiring acquittal of the accused.

Citation
PA-45A-71-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Firdaus bin Zainol
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 November 2019
Case Number
PA-45A-71-10/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
High Court Criminal Trial / Judgment (acquittal)
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged of both charges
Legal Topics
Possession of Drugs, Presumption of Possession (custody), Non Calling of Witnesses S114 Illustration (g), Accessibility to Vehicle/scene, Chain of Custody
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics Law Evidence Law Possession of Drugs Presumption of Possession (custody) Non Calling of Witnesses S114 Illustration (g) Accessibility to Vehicle/scene Chain of Custody

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

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Firdaus bin Zainol

Accused

Procedural Posture

High Court Criminal Trial / Judgment (acquittal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was in possession of the dangerous drugs found in the car booth
  2. 2 Whether custody was established so as to invoke the presumption under s37(d) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  3. 3 Whether the prosecution's failure to call key eyewitnesses created a fatal gap under s114 illustration (g) Evidence Act 1950

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to prove custody or exclusive control of the drugs and did not call key eyewitnesses whose evidence could have filled the gap; therefore the presumption under s37(d) DDA 1952 did not arise and reasonable doubt remained, requiring acquittal of the accused.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged of both charges

Orders

  • Accuse and discharge Firdaus bin Zainol of both charges
  • No further action taken and defence not called to present evidence