Tan Kok Bin [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

Tan Kok Bin [Timbalan (TPR), Jabatan Peguam Negara]

The Court of Appeal affirmed conviction because the prosecution proved the identity and net weight of the drugs and that the appellant had custody and control, thereby properly invoking section 37(d) DDA; the appellant failed to rebut the presumption and the innocent carrier defence was rejected on wilful blindness;...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
S-05(M)-426-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Tan Kok Bin; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
14 November 2024
Case Number
S-05(M)-426-11/2021 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Appeal
Outcome
Conviction affirmed; sentence varied
Legal Topics
Trafficking in Dangerous Drugs, Possession, Presumption of Possession S37(d) DDA, Innocent Carrier Defence, Wilful Blindness, Chain of Custody, Abolition of Mandatory Death Penalty (act 846)
Criminal Law Narcotics Law Evidence Law Sentencing Law Trafficking in Dangerous Drugs Possession Presumption of Possession S37(d) DDA Innocent Carrier Defence +3 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 5 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tan Kok Bin

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the prosecution proved trafficking under s39B DDA beyond reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether the presumption under section 37(d) DDA was properly invoked and rebutted
  3. 3 Whether the defence of innocent carrier succeeded

Ratio Decidendi

The Court of Appeal affirmed conviction because the prosecution proved the identity and net weight of the drugs and that the appellant had custody and control, thereby properly invoking section 37(d) DDA; the appellant failed to rebut the presumption and the innocent carrier defence was rejected on wilful blindness; on sentence, exercising discretion under Act 846 the court commuted the death sentence to 30 years' imprisonment commencing from date of arrest plus 14 strokes of whipping.

Court Disposition

Conviction affirmed; sentence varied

Orders

  • Conviction on the preferred charge under Section 39B Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 affirmed
  • Death sentence commuted to 30 years' imprisonment commencing from date of arrest