Khairol Anuar Bin Zakaria [ ]

Khairol Anuar Bin Zakaria [ ]

The Court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the seized material was cannabis (1,227.9g), that the accused had custody, control and knowledge of the drugs (supported by witness testimony, accused's conduct and statements admissible under s27 Evidence Act), and that the statutory presumption of trafficking under s37(da)(vi) DDA applied; conviction under s39B(1)(a) DDA was therefore affirmed and, in light of legislative removal of the mandatory death penalty, the death sentence was set aside and substituted with imprisonment for 30 years from date of arrest and 12 strokes of the cane.

Citation
D-05(M)-518-12/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant/accused: Khairol Anuar bin Zakaria; Respondent/prosecution: Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 November 2023
Case Number
D-05(M)-518-12/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Determination on Appeal Against Sentence (conviction Affirmed; Sentence Substituted)
Outcome
Conviction affirmed; sentence substituted
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Presumption of Trafficking, Admissibility of Statements (s27 Evidence Act), Sentencing Discretion After Amendment to DDA
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Trafficking Possession Presumption of Trafficking Admissibility of Statements (s27 Evidence Act) Sentencing Discretion After Amendment to DDA

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

Parties

Khairol Anuar bin Zakaria

Appellant/accused

Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)

Respondent/prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Determination on Appeal Against Sentence (conviction Affirmed; Sentence Substituted)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether seized material constituted a dangerous drug under the First Schedule of the DDA
  2. 2 Whether the accused had custody, control and knowledge of the drugs
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumption of trafficking under section 37(da)(vi) DDA applied

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the seized material was cannabis (1,227.9g), that the accused had custody, control and knowledge of the drugs (supported by witness testimony, accused's conduct and statements admissible under s27 Evidence Act), and that the statutory presumption of trafficking under s37(da)(vi) DDA applied; conviction under s39B(1)(a) DDA was therefore affirmed and, in light of legislative removal of the mandatory death penalty, the death sentence was set aside and substituted with imprisonment for 30 years from date of arrest and 12 strokes of the cane.

Court Disposition

Conviction affirmed; sentence substituted

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction struck out; conviction under section 39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 affirmed
  • Death sentence imposed by High Court set aside