MUHAMMAD LUKMAN BIN MOHAMAD

MUHAMMAD LUKMAN BIN MOHAMAD

Net weight/quantity of dangerous drugs specified in trafficking charges is an essential element; where prosecution fails to quantify or scientifically determine the amount claimed in the charges the prosecution cannot sustain a trafficking conviction under section 39B(1)(a). On these facts, because the chemist did not perform quantitative analysis and no other evidence established the charged quantities, convictions for the Delta-9 trafficking charges were unsafe and were set aside and substituted with convictions for possession under section 9 DDA 1952; medicinal use did not exempt appellant as no statutory authorization existed.

Citation
05(M)-300-12/2019(B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Parties
Appellant / Perayu: Muhammad Lukman bin Mohamad; Respondent / Public Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
17 February 2021
Case Number
05(M)-300-12/2019(B) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (federal Court) / Final Appeal Judgment (federal Court)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part in respect of 1st and 2nd (Delta-9) charges; convictions and death sentences for those charges set aside and substituted with convictions for possession under section 9 DDA 1952; appellant sentenced to five years' imprisonment for each substituted conviction to run concurrently from date of...
Legal Topics
Drug Trafficking, Quantitative Drug Analysis, Elements of Offence, Presumption of Trafficking, Medicinal Cannabis Policy
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Control Law Evidence Law Drug Trafficking Quantitative Drug Analysis Elements of Offence Presumption of Trafficking Medicinal Cannabis Policy

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

Parties

Muhammad Lukman bin Mohamad

Appellant / Perayu

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent / Public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (federal Court) / Final Appeal Judgment (federal Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution must establish net weight of impugned drugs to sustain a trafficking charge under section 39B(1)(a) DDA 1952
  2. 2 Whether, on the facts, appellant should be convicted under section 9 DDA 1952 because quantity could not be quantified
  3. 3 Whether the Delta-9 substances were medicinal cannabis exempt from DDA 1952

Ratio Decidendi

Net weight/quantity of dangerous drugs specified in trafficking charges is an essential element; where prosecution fails to quantify or scientifically determine the amount claimed in the charges the prosecution cannot sustain a trafficking conviction under section 39B(1)(a). On these facts, because the chemist did not perform quantitative analysis and no other evidence established the charged quantities, convictions for the Delta-9 trafficking charges were unsafe and were set aside and substituted with convictions for possession under section 9 DDA 1952; medicinal use did not exempt appellant as no statutory authorization existed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part in respect of 1st and 2nd (Delta-9) charges; convictions and death sentences for those charges set aside and substituted with convictions for possession under section 9 DDA 1952; appellant sentenced to five years' imprisonment for each substituted conviction to run concurrently from date of...

Orders

  • Convictions and death sentences in respect of 1st and 2nd charges set aside
  • Convictions substituted with offences of possession under section 9 DDA 1952