PENDAKWARAYA Tan Sze Meng

PENDAKWARAYA Tan Sze Meng

On maximum evaluation the prosecution proved identity of the substance (Cannabis, 45.45g net), continuity of custody and that the drugs were in open proximity in the accused's exclusive room together with clothing and bankbook linking the accused; clerical marking errors and absence of photos/fingerprints/DNA were not fatal; defence failed to give adequate Alcontara particulars or evidence to raise reasonable doubt; accused convicted under s.6 ADB read with s.39A(1) and sentenced to 30 months imprisonment; whipping not imposed due to s.289 CPC; execution of sentence stayed on conditions pending appeal.

Citation
JG-83D-99-03/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor); Defendant: Tan Sze Meng
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
9 February 2022
Case Number
JG-83D-99-03/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Drug Possession / Trial Judgment and Sentencing
Outcome
guilty - convicted under s.6 Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 read with s.39A(1)
Legal Topics
Possession, Chain of Custody, Admissibility of Expert Evidence, Marking of Exhibits, Alcontara Notice, Sentencing, Stay Pending Appeal
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Procedural Law Possession Chain of Custody Admissibility of Expert Evidence Marking of Exhibits +3 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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya (Public Prosecutor)

Prosecutor

Tan Sze Meng

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Drug Possession / Trial Judgment and Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved possession of cannabis under s.6 ADB read with s.39A(1)
  2. 2 Whether chain of custody and identity of exhibits were established despite marking errors
  3. 3 Whether chemist evidence was admissible and sufficient

Ratio Decidendi

On maximum evaluation the prosecution proved identity of the substance (Cannabis, 45.45g net), continuity of custody and that the drugs were in open proximity in the accused's exclusive room together with clothing and bankbook linking the accused; clerical marking errors and absence of photos/fingerprints/DNA were not fatal; defence failed to give adequate Alcontara particulars or evidence to raise reasonable doubt; accused convicted under s.6 ADB read with s.39A(1) and sentenced to 30 months imprisonment; whipping not imposed due to s.289 CPC; execution of sentence stayed on conditions pending appeal.

Court Disposition

guilty - convicted under s.6 Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 read with s.39A(1)

Orders

  • Sentence: 30 months imprisonment from date of conviction
  • No whipping imposed due to section 289 CPC (accused over 50 years)