PENDAKWARAYA Shahril Hasni bin Basharudin

PENDAKWARAYA Shahril Hasni bin Basharudin

Material contradictions between P6, P1 and SP1's oral testimony, the omission in P6 of the exhibit description and doubts as to contemporaneity and chain of custody created a reasonable doubt that the drugs were recovered from the appellant; prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case and the trial magistrate misdirected by relying on an inadmissible custodial statement and failing to observe s173 procedural safeguards, therefore the conviction was unsafe and was reversed.

Citation
AB - 41S (A) - 2 - 10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Appellant/accused: Shahril Hasni bin Basharudin; Respondent/public Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor
Court
A
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
15 January 2021
Case Number
AB - 41S (A) - 2 - 10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrate's Conviction
Outcome
Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed; accused acquitted and discharged
Legal Topics
Possession of Dangerous Drugs, Chain of Custody and Senarai Bongkar (search List), Contemporaneity of Police Reports, Prima Facie Case Under Section 173 CPC, Admissibility of Custodial Statements (s112/113 Cpc), Non‑compliance With Procedural Obligations (s173(ha) Cpc)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Evidence Procedural Law Drugs Control Legislation Possession of Dangerous Drugs Chain of Custody and Senarai Bongkar (search List) Contemporaneity of Police Reports Prima Facie Case Under Section 173 CPC +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 7 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Shahril Hasni bin Basharudin

Appellant/accused

Public Prosecutor

Respondent/public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From Magistrate's Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established prima facie case of possession of dangerous drugs
  2. 2 Whether P6 (senarai bongkar) was contemporaneous and corroborated SP1's oral testimony
  3. 3 Whether contradictions between P6, P1 and oral testimony create reasonable doubt

Ratio Decidendi

Material contradictions between P6, P1 and SP1's oral testimony, the omission in P6 of the exhibit description and doubts as to contemporaneity and chain of custody created a reasonable doubt that the drugs were recovered from the appellant; prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case and the trial magistrate misdirected by relying on an inadmissible custodial statement and failing to observe s173 procedural safeguards, therefore the conviction was unsafe and was reversed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; conviction and sentence quashed; accused acquitted and discharged

Orders

  • Finding of guilt and order of conviction reversed
  • Accused acquitted and discharged