[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] VEAKNESWARAN A/L RAMASAMY

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] VEAKNESWARAN A/L RAMASAMY

The court held that the prosecution proved the identity of the seized substances and established a prima facie case only for the drugs seized at the petrol station (sufficient evidence of possession, control and knowledge) but failed to show prima facie that the accused had possession, control or knowledge of drugs found in the two residences due to credible witness testimony denying the accused's presence and material conflicts in prosecution witnesses; accordingly the accused was called to enter defence only on the petrol-station related charges and was discharged and acquitted without being called to defend on the residential charges.

Citation
CB-45A-21-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Veakneswaran a/l Ramasamy
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 January 2026
Case Number
CB-45A-21-11/2022 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Drugs / End of Prosecution Case (prima Facie Assessment Under Section 180 Kpj)
Outcome
Mixed: acquittals on charges relating to drugs found at two residences; accused called to enter defence on charges relating to drugs found at the petrol station.
Legal Topics
Possession, Control and Knowledge, Trafficking/distribution, Prima Facie Standard, Search and Seizure, Chain of Custody, Section 27 Evidence Act 1950, Sections 12(2), 39 a and 39 B Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics/drugs Law Evidence Law Possession Control and Knowledge Trafficking/distribution Prima Facie Standard Search and Seizure +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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Veakneswaran a/l Ramasamy

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Drugs / End of Prosecution Case (prima Facie Assessment Under Section 180 Kpj)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case for each charge
  2. 2 Whether accused had possession, control and knowledge of drugs found at two residences
  3. 3 Whether accused had possession, control and knowledge of drugs found at the petrol station

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that the prosecution proved the identity of the seized substances and established a prima facie case only for the drugs seized at the petrol station (sufficient evidence of possession, control and knowledge) but failed to show prima facie that the accused had possession, control or knowledge of drugs found in the two residences due to credible witness testimony denying the accused's presence and material conflicts in prosecution witnesses; accordingly the accused was called to enter defence only on the petrol-station related charges and was discharged and acquitted without being called to defend on the residential charges.

Court Disposition

Mixed: acquittals on charges relating to drugs found at two residences; accused called to enter defence on charges relating to drugs found at the petrol station.

Orders

  • Case CB-45A-21-11/2022 (pertuduhan pertama and pertuduhan kedua) - accused acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence.
  • Case CB-45-18-11/2022 - accused called to enter defence.