[TIMBALAN ] MOHD RONI BIN AYOB

[TIMBALAN ] MOHD RONI BIN AYOB

The court held that at the end of the prosecution case a prima facie case of possession under s.12(2) ADB was established but the prosecution did not prove that the accused had the requisite 'power to deal with the drugs to the exclusion of others' required to apply the s.37(da)(iiia) trafficking presumption; accordingly the accused was discharged from the original s.39B(1)(a) charge and the court called the accused to defend on amended charges under s.12(2) (punishable under s.39A(2)) and on the two s.12(2) counts in the other file (punishable under s.12(3)). The prosecution's appeal at the end of the prosecution case was competent per authoritative decisions (Lecthumanan, Karpal Singh)...

Citation
CA-45-4-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Mohd Roni bin Ayob
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
10 May 2024
Case Number
CA-45-4-09/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / End of Prosecution Case
Outcome
Accused discharged from original trafficking charge under s.39B(1)(a) ADB in CA-45A-5-09/2020; accused called to defend on substituted/amended charges under s.12(2) ADB (punishable under s.39A(2)); in CA-45-4-09/2020 accused called to defend on both counts under s.12(2) ADB (punishable under s.12(3)). Prosecution's...
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Prima Facie Case, Statutory Presumptions, Appealability of Interlocutory Decisions, Failure to Call Witness
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics / Dangerous Drugs Law Evidence Law Procedure Possession Trafficking Prima Facie Case Statutory Presumptions +2 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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Mohd Roni bin Ayob

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / End of Prosecution Case

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution may appeal the trial court's decision made at the end of the prosecution case
  2. 2 Whether a prima facie case of possession and trafficking under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (ADB) was established
  3. 3 Whether the statutory presumption of trafficking under s.37(da)(iiia) ADB applies

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that at the end of the prosecution case a prima facie case of possession under s.12(2) ADB was established but the prosecution did not prove that the accused had the requisite 'power to deal with the drugs to the exclusion of others' required to apply the s.37(da)(iiia) trafficking presumption; accordingly the accused was discharged from the original s.39B(1)(a) charge and the court called the accused to defend on amended charges under s.12(2) (punishable under s.39A(2)) and on the two s.12(2) counts in the other file (punishable under s.12(3)). The prosecution's appeal at the end of the prosecution case was competent per authoritative decisions (Lecthumanan, Karpal Singh)...

Court Disposition

Accused discharged from original trafficking charge under s.39B(1)(a) ADB in CA-45A-5-09/2020; accused called to defend on substituted/amended charges under s.12(2) ADB (punishable under s.39A(2)); in CA-45-4-09/2020 accused called to defend on both counts under s.12(2) ADB (punishable under s.12(3)). Prosecution's...

Orders

  • In CA-45A-5-09/2020 accused Mohd Roni bin Ayob is discharged and acquitted of the original charge under s.39B(1)(a) ADB (punishable under s.39B(2))
  • In CA-45A-5-09/2020 accused is called to enter his defence on the amended charge under s.12(2) ADB (punishable under s.39A(2))