[ ] 1. ) Lim Kent Soon 2. ) Maria Arokiam A/l Ramalingam

[ ] 1. ) Lim Kent Soon 2. ) Maria Arokiam A/l Ramalingam

Prosecution failed to prove the identity of the person who had custody or control of the container beyond reasonable doubt; gaps in identification evidence, failure to call or tender CCTV and proximate surveillance witnesses and absence of proof of custody/control by the 2nd accused undermined the s37(d) presumption; therefore accused(s) must be acquitted.

Citation
BA-45A-78-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor (Pendakwa Raya); 1st Accused: Lim Kent Soon; 2nd Accused: Maria Arokiam a/l Ramalingam
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
31 October 2022
Case Number
BA-45A-78-08/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Trafficking / Judgment
Outcome
1st accused (Lim Kent Soon) acquitted and discharged; 2nd accused (Maria Arokiam a/l Ramalingam) acquitted and discharged
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Identification Evidence, Presumptions (s37 Dda), Rebuttal Evidence, Informers Protection, CCTV and Witness Availability
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Criminal Procedure Trafficking Possession Identification Evidence Presumptions (s37 Dda) +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor (Pendakwa Raya)

Prosecutor

Lim Kent Soon

1st Accused

Maria Arokiam a/l Ramalingam

2nd Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Trafficking / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether s37(d) Dangerous Drugs Act presumption of possession and knowledge was properly invoked and rebutted
  3. 3 Whether both accused shared common intention to traffic (s34 Penal Code)

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to prove the identity of the person who had custody or control of the container beyond reasonable doubt; gaps in identification evidence, failure to call or tender CCTV and proximate surveillance witnesses and absence of proof of custody/control by the 2nd accused undermined the s37(d) presumption; therefore accused(s) must be acquitted.

Court Disposition

1st accused (Lim Kent Soon) acquitted and discharged; 2nd accused (Maria Arokiam a/l Ramalingam) acquitted and discharged

Orders

  • 1st accused acquitted and discharged
  • 2nd accused acquitted and discharged