TAN CHENG KIT

TAN CHENG KIT

The Court dismissed the appeal because the trial judge's findings that the appellant had custody/control and knowledge of the drugs were supported by compelling evidence — keys and access card in appellant's hand, appellant guided police and opened the unit, extensive incriminating items in plain view, and DNA linking appellant to items — the appellant failed to rebut the statutory presumption under s.37(da) DDA on the balance of probabilities and there was no basis to draw an adverse inference for non‑calling of Caroline Tan.

Citation
J-05(SH)-509-11/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Tan Cheng Kit; Respondent: Pendakwa Raya
Court
SH
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 December 2025
Case Number
J-05(SH)-509-11/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Decision on Appeal (court of Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences upheld
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Presumption of Possession Under S.37(da) DDA, Knowledge Element, Adverse Inference S.114(g) Evidence Act, DNA Evidence, Appellate Review of Factual Findings
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Appellate Procedure Poisons Regulation Trafficking Possession Presumption of Possession Under S.37(da) DDA +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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Cheng Kit

Appellant

Pendakwa Raya

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Decision on Appeal (court of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved appellant had custody/control of drugs and poisons
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved appellant had knowledge of drugs and poisons
  3. 3 Whether appellant's defence was a mere bare denial or an afterthought

Ratio Decidendi

The Court dismissed the appeal because the trial judge's findings that the appellant had custody/control and knowledge of the drugs were supported by compelling evidence — keys and access card in appellant's hand, appellant guided police and opened the unit, extensive incriminating items in plain view, and DNA linking appellant to items — the appellant failed to rebut the statutory presumption under s.37(da) DDA on the balance of probabilities and there was no basis to draw an adverse inference for non‑calling of Caroline Tan.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; convictions and sentences upheld

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed
  • Convictions under Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and Poisons Act 1952 affirmed