PENDAKWARAYA 1. MURALIKRISHNA A/L NOKIAH 2. YUARAJA A/L RAJAGOPAL 3. ARUNASALAM A/L SUPUMARAN 4. SUNDER A/L SUPUMARAN 5. MOHANAMBAL A/P PUSHPANATHAN

PENDAKWARAYA 1. MURALIKRISHNA A/L NOKIAH 2. YUARAJA A/L RAJAGOPAL 3. ARUNASALAM A/L SUPUMARAN 4. SUNDER A/L SUPUMARAN 5. MOHANAMBAL A/P PUSHPANATHAN

Court convicted 1st, 2nd and 3rd accused for First Case because AP1's negotiations with the 1st accused constituted a negotiated sale (trafficking) proven on maximum evaluation, chemist corroboration confirmed Methamphetamine 356.4g, and the acts of 2nd and 3rd supported a common intention under s.34; prosecution failed to prove Second Case independently (no negotiated sale or proof of possession for 1,242.0g) and failed to prove acts linking 4th and 5th to common intention, so they were acquitted in the First Case and all accused acquitted in Second Case.

Citation
WA-45A-17-05/2019 & WA-45A-18-05/2019 (didengar bersama) (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; 1st Accused: Muralikrishna a/l Nokiah; 2nd Accused: Yuaraja a/l Rajagopal; 3rd Accused: Arunasalam a/l Supumaran; 4th Accused: Sunder a/l Supumaran; 5th Accused: Mohanambal a/p Pushpanathan
Court
didengar bersama
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
22 December 2021
Case Number
WA-45A-17-05/2019 & WA-45A-18-05/2019 (didengar bersama) (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Drugs (trafficking) / Judgment and Sentencing (trial Concluded)
Outcome
1st, 2nd and 3rd accused convicted under s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 for trafficking Methamphetamine 356.4g and sentenced to death; 4th and 5th acquitted and discharged in First Case; all accused acquitted and discharged in Second Case.
Legal Topics
Trafficking Under Dangerous Drugs Act, Agent Provocateur Evidence, Chain of Custody, Alcontara Notice, Adverse Inference S.114(g) Evidence Act, Common Intention S.34 Penal Code, Statutory Presumptions S.37 DDA, Amendment of Charge
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Law Evidence Law Procedure Trafficking Under Dangerous Drugs Act Agent Provocateur Evidence Chain of Custody Alcontara Notice +4 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 7 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Muralikrishna a/l Nokiah

1st Accused

Yuaraja a/l Rajagopal

2nd Accused

Arunasalam a/l Supumaran

3rd Accused

Sunder a/l Supumaran

4th Accused

Mohanambal a/p Pushpanathan

5th Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Drugs (trafficking) / Judgment and Sentencing (trial Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved prima facie case for First Case (356.4g Methamphetamine)
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved prima facie case for Second Case (1,242.0g Methamphetamine)
  3. 3 Admissibility and credibility of agent provocateur evidence (s.40A DDA)

Ratio Decidendi

Court convicted 1st, 2nd and 3rd accused for First Case because AP1's negotiations with the 1st accused constituted a negotiated sale (trafficking) proven on maximum evaluation, chemist corroboration confirmed Methamphetamine 356.4g, and the acts of 2nd and 3rd supported a common intention under s.34; prosecution failed to prove Second Case independently (no negotiated sale or proof of possession for 1,242.0g) and failed to prove acts linking 4th and 5th to common intention, so they were acquitted in the First Case and all accused acquitted in Second Case.

Court Disposition

1st, 2nd and 3rd accused convicted under s.39B(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 for trafficking Methamphetamine 356.4g and sentenced to death; 4th and 5th acquitted and discharged in First Case; all accused acquitted and discharged in Second Case.

Orders

  • Amend the First Case charge to read s.39B(1)(a) DDA read together with s.34 Penal Code (allowed under s.158 CrPC)
  • Call upon 1st, 2nd and 3rd accused to enter defence (on amended charge)