Kaidal Bin Sahidin [ ]

Kaidal Bin Sahidin [ ]

PW6’s testimony that the accused, who was alone in the vehicle, voluntarily handed over a black plastic bag containing crystalline methamphetamine after a statutory caution was administered was credible and unchallenged at trial; the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption of trafficking under s37(da)(xvi)...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
S-05(SH)-444-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Kaidal bin Sahidin; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
SH
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
18 June 2025
Case Number
S-05(SH)-444-10/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Presumption of Trafficking, Chain of Custody, Corroboration, Adverse Inference, Statutory Caution, Appeal Pleading Requirements, Sentencing
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Procedure Trafficking Possession Presumption of Trafficking Chain of Custody +5 more

Source-derived case record

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

Parties

Kaidal bin Sahidin

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court correctly convicted relying primarily on PW6’s evidence
  2. 2 Whether the prosecution’s failure to call the vehicle owner (Habib) permits an adverse inference under s114(g) Evidence Act
  3. 3 Whether possession and knowledge were proved beyond reasonable doubt and whether s37(da)(xvi) presumption properly invoked

Ratio Decidendi

PW6’s testimony that the accused, who was alone in the vehicle, voluntarily handed over a black plastic bag containing crystalline methamphetamine after a statutory caution was administered was credible and unchallenged at trial; the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption of trafficking under s37(da)(xvi) on the balance of probabilities; the prosecution’s discretionary decision not to call the vehicle owner (Habib) did not justify an adverse inference because Habib was not a material witness whose absence undermined a prima facie case; accordingly conviction under s39B(1)(a) DDA and sentences were affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; conviction and sentence affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed.
  • Appeal against sentence dismissed.