KONG SENG LONG [Jabatan Peguam Negara]

KONG SENG LONG [Jabatan Peguam Negara]

The Court held that (1) inconsistencies in PW5’s account were satisfactorily explained and did not render the information unreliable; (2) the appellant’s conduct in picking up and handing over the drugs was admissible as conduct under s8 Evidence Act 1950 and was not a 'statement' within s37B DDA requiring a statutory caution; (3) the prosecution called all persons who could have accessed the room and provided evidence excluding third‑party access, establishing exclusive possession by the appellant; and (4) there was no fatal break in the chain of custody; accordingly the convictions and sentences were safe and the appeals were dismissed.

Citation
J-05(M)-179-06/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Kong Seng Long; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
24 January 2022
Case Number
J-05(M)-179-06/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal at Court of Appeal; Appeal Dismissed and Convictions and Sentences Affirmed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed by Court of Appeal
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Section 37(da) DDA Presumption, Section 37 B DDA Caution and Scope, Section 27 Evidence Act Information Leading to Discovery, Section 8 Evidence Act Conduct Admissible, Chain of Custody, Accessibility of Premises and Exclusion of Third‑party Access
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Possession Trafficking Section 37(da) DDA Presumption Section 37 B DDA Caution and Scope Section 27 Evidence Act Information Leading to Discovery +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 6 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kong Seng Long

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal at Court of Appeal; Appeal Dismissed and Convictions and Sentences Affirmed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility and reliability of information leading to discovery under s27 Evidence Act 1950
  2. 2 Whether conduct of accused (leading/picking up/handing over drugs) is a 'statement' requiring caution under s37B Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  3. 3 Whether prosecution excluded possibility of third‑party access to the room and drugs (possession)

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that (1) inconsistencies in PW5’s account were satisfactorily explained and did not render the information unreliable; (2) the appellant’s conduct in picking up and handing over the drugs was admissible as conduct under s8 Evidence Act 1950 and was not a 'statement' within s37B DDA requiring a statutory caution; (3) the prosecution called all persons who could have accessed the room and provided evidence excluding third‑party access, establishing exclusive possession by the appellant; and (4) there was no fatal break in the chain of custody; accordingly the convictions and sentences were safe and the appeals were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences affirmed by Court of Appeal

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions for all six charges affirmed