PUBLIC PROSECUTOR NURDDIN BIN SAHIBUDDIN

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR NURDDIN BIN SAHIBUDDIN

Appeal dismissed and High Court acquittal affirmed because the defence evidence, corroborated by DW2, raised a real and reasonable doubt as to exclusive possession and implicated others as potential traffickers; prosecution failed to call a material witness (Sergeant Mapatoba) and the learned trial judge’s reliance...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
S-05(LB)-610-12/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Public Prosecutor; Respondent: Nurddin bin Sahibuddin
Court
LB
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
25 November 2019
Case Number
S-05(LB)-610-12/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Appeal Dismissed and High Court Acquittal Affirmed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; acquittal and discharge by High Court affirmed.
Legal Topics
Drug Trafficking, Possession, Statutory Presumption, Section 37 Dangerous Drugs Act, Section 37 a Constitutional Challenge, Afterthought Defence, Credibility of Witness, Radhi Direction
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Constitutional Law Drug Trafficking Possession Statutory Presumption Section 37 Dangerous Drugs Act +4 more

Source-derived case record

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 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Appellant

Nurddin bin Sahibuddin

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment Appeal Dismissed and High Court Acquittal Affirmed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved trafficking beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether defence was an afterthought or bona fide and whether it raised reasonable doubt
  3. 3 Whether statutory presumptions under s.37(d) and s.37(da) could be invoked and rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal dismissed and High Court acquittal affirmed because the defence evidence, corroborated by DW2, raised a real and reasonable doubt as to exclusive possession and implicated others as potential traffickers; prosecution failed to call a material witness (Sergeant Mapatoba) and the learned trial judge’s reliance on double presumptions (invoking s.37A implications) meant conviction would not be safe given constitutional authority on s.37A; no appellate intervention warranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; acquittal and discharge by High Court affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the High Court affirmed