1. ) R. KARUPPIAH @ RAJA A/L RAMASAMY 2. ) LEMAN COLLINS OSUJI

1. ) R. KARUPPIAH @ RAJA A/L RAMASAMY 2. ) LEMAN COLLINS OSUJI

On maximum evaluation the prosecution failed to prove mens rea/knowledge for OKT1 regarding the sealed parcel and failed to prove physical control or custody by OKT2; investigative gaps and contradictions meant no safe inference of possession or common intention could be drawn, therefore no prima facie case existed and both accused were to be acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence.

Citation
BA-45A-100-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused (okt1): R. Karuppiah @ Raja A/L Ramasamy; Accused (okt2): Leman Collins Osuji
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
31 January 2023
Case Number
BA-45A-100-10/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Trafficking / End of Prosecution; Acquitted and Discharged Without Being Called to Enter Defence; Prosecution Has Filed an Appeal
Outcome
Both accused acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence for BA-45A-99-10/2019 and BA-45A-100-10/2019; prosecution has filed an appeal.
Legal Topics
Prima Facie, Possession, Chain of Custody, Controlled Delivery, Common Intention, Innocent Carrier, Section 39 B Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, Section 34 Penal Code
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Law Criminal Procedure Evidence Prima Facie Possession Chain of Custody Controlled Delivery +4 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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

R. Karuppiah @ Raja A/L Ramasamy

Accused (okt1)

Leman Collins Osuji

Accused (okt2)

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Trafficking / End of Prosecution; Acquitted and Discharged Without Being Called to Enter Defence; Prosecution Has Filed an Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case at close of its case
  2. 2 Whether the accused had possession and knowledge (mens rea) of the drugs
  3. 3 Whether chain of custody and forensic analysis sufficiently linked exhibits to accused

Ratio Decidendi

On maximum evaluation the prosecution failed to prove mens rea/knowledge for OKT1 regarding the sealed parcel and failed to prove physical control or custody by OKT2; investigative gaps and contradictions meant no safe inference of possession or common intention could be drawn, therefore no prima facie case existed and both accused were to be acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence.

Court Disposition

Both accused acquitted and discharged without being called to enter defence for BA-45A-99-10/2019 and BA-45A-100-10/2019; prosecution has filed an appeal.

Orders

  • OKT1 (R. Karuppiah @ Raja A/L Ramasamy) released and discharged without being called to enter defence in BA-45A-99-10/2019 and BA-45A-100-10/2019
  • OKT2 (Leman Collins Osuji) released and discharged without being called to enter defence in BA-45A-100-10/2019