[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MOHD KHAIRUL AZWAN BIN ZAKARIA 2. ) BHAHIRA BIN FAKRI

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MOHD KHAIRUL AZWAN BIN ZAKARIA 2. ) BHAHIRA BIN FAKRI

Material and credible prosecution evidence (raiding officers' testimony, CCTV, proximity of accused personal items with seized packages, DNA/fitting exercise, qualified chemist analysis confirming heroin/monoacetylmorphines and weights) established custody/control and warranted an inference of knowledge; statutory presumption under s37(da) applied and was not rebutted on balance of probabilities; defence explanations were found to be afterthoughts and insufficient to raise reasonable doubt; therefore accused were guilty and liable to life imprisonment and whipping under s39B(2)/(2A) DDA.

Citation
WA-45A-6-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Mohd Khairul Azwan bin Zakaria; Accused: Bhahira bin Fakri
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
16 February 2023
Case Number
WA-45A-6-02/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Trafficking / Trial Judgment (conviction and Sentencing)
Outcome
Both accused convicted
Legal Topics
Drug Trafficking, Possession and Knowledge, Chain of Custody, Statutory Presumption (s37(da)), Prima Facie Test (s180 Cpc), Common Intention (s34 Penal Code), Sentencing Discretion Under S39 B(2)/(2 A) DDA
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Law Evidence Procedural Law Drug Trafficking Possession and Knowledge Chain of Custody Statutory Presumption (s37(da)) +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 29 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Mohd Khairul Azwan bin Zakaria

Accused

Bhahira bin Fakri

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Trafficking / Trial Judgment (conviction and Sentencing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Identity and integrity of seized drugs and any break in chain of custody
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved possession (custody/control) and knowledge by accused
  3. 3 Whether non-calling of car owner and other witnesses warranted adverse inference under s114(g) Evidence Act

Ratio Decidendi

Material and credible prosecution evidence (raiding officers' testimony, CCTV, proximity of accused personal items with seized packages, DNA/fitting exercise, qualified chemist analysis confirming heroin/monoacetylmorphines and weights) established custody/control and warranted an inference of knowledge; statutory presumption under s37(da) applied and was not rebutted on balance of probabilities; defence explanations were found to be afterthoughts and insufficient to raise reasonable doubt; therefore accused were guilty and liable to life imprisonment and whipping under s39B(2)/(2A) DDA.

Court Disposition

Both accused convicted

Orders

  • Convicted of trafficking dangerous drugs as charged under section 39B(1)(a) read with section 39B(2) and section 34 Penal Code
  • Sentenced to life imprisonment from date of arrest 20/06/2019 and to receive 15 strokes of whipping