Public Prosecutor Mohd Khairul Mahadi bin Hanapi

Public Prosecutor Mohd Khairul Mahadi bin Hanapi

Evidence established that the accused's urine sample was labelled, sealed and analyzed showing methamphetamine; discrepancies were immaterial; chain of custody gaps were not fatal given sealing and continuity to chemist; statutory presumption under s.37(k) applied and was not rebutted; charge amended under s.158 CPC to correct place; consequently prosecution proved a prima facie case under s.15(1)(a) DDA 1952 and accused was guilty.

Citation
BH-82D-6-07/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Defendant: Mohd Khairul Mahadi bin Hanapi
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 October 2022
Case Number
BH-82D-6-07/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Trial / Conviction and Sentencing (magistrates' Judgment)
Outcome
Guilty on amended charge under s.15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
Legal Topics
Self Administration of Drugs, Chain of Custody, Presumption of Consumption S.37(k), Compliance With S.31 A(1 A), Amendment of Charge Under S.158 CPC, Sentencing Principles
Source Language
Malay/English
Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 Criminal Procedure Code Evidence Law Self Administration of Drugs Chain of Custody Presumption of Consumption S.37(k) Compliance With S.31 A(1 A) Amendment of Charge Under S.158 CPC +1 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 7 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Mohd Khairul Mahadi bin Hanapi

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Trial / Conviction and Sentencing (magistrates' Judgment)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved offence under s.15(1)(a) DDA 1952
  2. 2 Whether place of offence as charged required amendment
  3. 3 Whether there was fatal break in chain of custody and non-production of bottle

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence established that the accused's urine sample was labelled, sealed and analyzed showing methamphetamine; discrepancies were immaterial; chain of custody gaps were not fatal given sealing and continuity to chemist; statutory presumption under s.37(k) applied and was not rebutted; charge amended under s.158 CPC to correct place; consequently prosecution proved a prima facie case under s.15(1)(a) DDA 1952 and accused was guilty.

Court Disposition

Guilty on amended charge under s.15(1)(a) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952

Orders

  • Convicted on amended charge specifying Dewan Bunga Raya FRU Cheras as place of offence
  • Fine RM5000 in default five months imprisonment