Teo Kian Chun Tan Hark Liang Public Prosecutor

Teo Kian Chun Tan Hark Liang Public Prosecutor

Use of concurrent statutory presumptions (double presumptions) by the trial judge rendered the convictions unsafe; additionally material evidential omission (relevant portion of CCTV) prejudiced the defence and there was insufficient evidence to prove trafficking beyond the presumptions, therefore convictions and sentences could not be sustained and appellants must be acquitted and discharged.

Citation
J-05(M)-281-05/2018 , J-05(M)-282-05/2018 , J-05(M)-286-05/2018 , J-05(M)-287-05/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Parties
Appellant: Teo Kian Chun; Appellant: Tan Hark Liang; Respondent: Public Prosecutor
Court
M
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
29 July 2019
Case Number
J-05(M)-281-05/2018 , J-05(M)-282-05/2018 , J-05(M)-286-05/2018 , J-05(M)-287-05/2018 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment — Appeal Heard and Allowed
Legal Topics
Possession, Trafficking, Statutory Presumptions, Chain of Custody, CCTV Evidence, Alcontara Notice, Burden of Proof, Double Presumptions
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drug Offences Evidence Law Constitutional Law Possession Trafficking Statutory Presumptions Chain of Custody +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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Teo Kian Chun

Appellant

Tan Hark Liang

Appellant

Public Prosecutor

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment — Appeal Heard and Allowed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in invoking two statutory presumptions concurrently (Section 37(d) and Section 37(da))
  2. 2 Whether custody, control, knowledge and possession were proven despite alleged break in chain of evidence and suppression of CCTV footage
  3. 3 Whether the defence that appellants took a wrong bag was an afterthought or gave adequate notice (Alcontara) requiring investigation by prosecution

Ratio Decidendi

Use of concurrent statutory presumptions (double presumptions) by the trial judge rendered the convictions unsafe; additionally material evidential omission (relevant portion of CCTV) prejudiced the defence and there was insufficient evidence to prove trafficking beyond the presumptions, therefore convictions and sentences could not be sustained and appellants must be acquitted and discharged.