RAVEEN A/L KUHAN

RAVEEN A/L KUHAN

Having weighed mitigating factors (first offender, youth, family dependants, low quantity of methamphetamine 9.35g, employment, medical history, guilty plea) against public interest, and having regard to statutory amendments enabling Compulsory Attendance Orders and relevant authorities, the court held that the mandatory minimum custodial term was not appropriate in this case and lawfully substituted custody with a Compulsory Attendance Order (PKW) of 4 hours daily for 12 months, secured by a RM2500 bond with one surety; failure to comply will expose the accused to the original custodial sentence.

Citation
WA-83D-8895-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: PENDAKWA RAYA; Accused: RAVEEN A/L KUHAN
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
26 September 2024
Case Number
WA-83D-8895-08/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (narcotics) / Sentencing / Reasons for Sentence (compulsory Attendance Order Imposed)
Outcome
Accused convicted; sentenced to a Compulsory Attendance Order under the Akta Kehadiran Wajib Pesalah-Pesalah 1954 for 4 hours daily for 12 months, with a secured bond of RM2500 and one surety; original custodial sentence reserved if order is breached.
Legal Topics
Mandatory Minimum Sentence, Compulsory Attendance Order, Plea Bargaining, Mitigation, Public Interest, Sentence Substitution, Statutory Interpretation
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Sentencing Law Procedural Law Mandatory Minimum Sentence Compulsory Attendance Order Plea Bargaining Mitigation +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 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PENDAKWA RAYA

Prosecutor

RAVEEN A/L KUHAN

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (narcotics) / Sentencing / Reasons for Sentence (compulsory Attendance Order Imposed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the court is bound to impose the mandatory minimum custodial sentence for possession of methamphetamine under Seksyen 12(2) read with Seksyen 39A(1) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 or may substitute a non-custodial Compulsory Attendance Order under the Akta Kehadiran Wajib Pesalah-Pesalah 1954 as amended
  2. 2 Appropriate weight to be given to guilty plea and mitigating personal circumstances versus public interest and deterrence
  3. 3 Application of statutory provisions (s173A, s293, s294 Kanun Tatacara Jenayah) and relevant authorities permitting non-custodial disposition despite statutory prison mandates

Ratio Decidendi

Having weighed mitigating factors (first offender, youth, family dependants, low quantity of methamphetamine 9.35g, employment, medical history, guilty plea) against public interest, and having regard to statutory amendments enabling Compulsory Attendance Orders and relevant authorities, the court held that the mandatory minimum custodial term was not appropriate in this case and lawfully substituted custody with a Compulsory Attendance Order (PKW) of 4 hours daily for 12 months, secured by a RM2500 bond with one surety; failure to comply will expose the accused to the original custodial sentence.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted; sentenced to a Compulsory Attendance Order under the Akta Kehadiran Wajib Pesalah-Pesalah 1954 for 4 hours daily for 12 months, with a secured bond of RM2500 and one surety; original custodial sentence reserved if order is breached.

Orders

  • Accused convicted of possession of methamphetamine contrary to Seksyen 12(2) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 read with Seksyen 39A(1).
  • Compulsory Attendance Order imposed under Akta Kehadiran Wajib Pesalah-Pesalah 1954: attend daily 4 hours for 12 months.