[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MURUKAN A/L RAMAKRISHNAN 2. ) RAJA SEKAR SELVAM

[Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara] 1. ) MURUKAN A/L RAMAKRISHNAN 2. ) RAJA SEKAR SELVAM

The Court held the prosecution had adduced a prima facie case of possession and trafficking against the accused based on the quantity and location of drugs, contemporaneous conduct, proximity and statutory presumptions; the deficiencies complained of (unproduced CCTV, phones, pink bag, non‑attendance of some third parties) did not constitute withholding or suppression of material evidence to attract an adverse inference under s114(g); therefore the High Court was wrong to discharge the accused at the close of prosecution and the acquittal was set aside and the accused ordered to be called to enter their defence.

Citation
W-05(LB)-402-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant / Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Respondent / Accused (respondent 1): Murukan a/l Ramakrishnan; Respondent / Accused (respondent 2): Raja Sekar Selvam
Court
LB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 May 2025
Case Number
W-05(LB)-402-09/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (drug Offences) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Allowed)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part: High Court order of acquittal and discharge set aside; respondent ordered to be called to enter defence.
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Common Intention, Prima Facie, Adverse Inference Under S114(g) Evidence Act 1950, Forensic/corroborative Evidence (cctv, Phones, Fingerprints)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Appellate Procedure Possession Trafficking Common Intention Prima Facie +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Appellant / Prosecution

Murukan a/l Ramakrishnan

Respondent / Accused (respondent 1)

Raja Sekar Selvam

Respondent / Accused (respondent 2)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (drug Offences) / Court of Appeal Judgment (appeal Allowed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution adduced a prima facie case to call accused to defence
  2. 2 Whether possession and knowledge of drugs were proven (exclusive or joint possession)
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumption of trafficking applies

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held the prosecution had adduced a prima facie case of possession and trafficking against the accused based on the quantity and location of drugs, contemporaneous conduct, proximity and statutory presumptions; the deficiencies complained of (unproduced CCTV, phones, pink bag, non‑attendance of some third parties) did not constitute withholding or suppression of material evidence to attract an adverse inference under s114(g); therefore the High Court was wrong to discharge the accused at the close of prosecution and the acquittal was set aside and the accused ordered to be called to enter their defence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part: High Court order of acquittal and discharge set aside; respondent ordered to be called to enter defence.

Orders

  • Allow appeal by Pendakwa Raya dated 12 September 2023
  • Set aside the High Court order of discharge and acquittal made on 6 September 2023