PENDAKWARAYA Tn. Mohd. Radzi bin Abdul Razak together with Pn. Fatin Hanum & Pn. Kirubini a/p G. Subramaniam Public Prosecutor [Attorney General’s Chambers En. Chris Kooi together with Cik Chin Ai Wei [Messrs. Kit & Associates

PENDAKWARAYA Tn. Mohd. Radzi bin Abdul Razak together with Pn. Fatin Hanum & Pn. Kirubini a/p G. Subramaniam Public Prosecutor [Attorney General’s Chambers En. Chris Kooi together with Cik Chin Ai Wei [Messrs. Kit & Associates

The oral information given by the accused in custody was admissible under s27 and, together with the keys, conduct of leading police and chain of custody, established actual and exclusive possession and knowledge of the drugs; statutory presumption under s37(da) applied to MDMA and Methamphetamine and was not rebutted on the balance of probabilities; trafficking established for other drugs by evidence of concealment, quantities and manufacturing implements; s39B(2A)(d) was not satisfied so no basis to avoid mandatory sentencing under s39B(2); conviction entered on all five charges and death sentence imposed for charges 1–4 and fixed imprisonment and whipping for charge 5.

Citation
45A-13-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecutor: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Chow Kum Yuen
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
23 November 2019
Case Number
45A-13-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Dangerous Drugs (trafficking) / Trial Judgment and Sentencing (conviction and Sentence Pronounced)
Outcome
Accused convicted on all five charges; death sentence imposed for Charges 1 to 4; ten years imprisonment and ten strokes imposed for Charge 5.
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Admissibility Under Section 27 Evidence Act 1950, Statutory Presumption Under S37(da) DDA, Sentence Discretion Under S39 B(2 A) DDA, Chain of Custody
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Drugs Law Evidence Law Sentencing Law Trafficking Possession Admissibility Under Section 27 Evidence Act 1950 Statutory Presumption Under S37(da) DDA +2 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 25 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecutor

Chow Kum Yuen

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Dangerous Drugs (trafficking) / Trial Judgment and Sentencing (conviction and Sentence Pronounced)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statement made by accused admissible under s27 Evidence Act 1950
  2. 2 Whether accused had possession and knowledge of drugs found at No.107
  3. 3 Whether acts and circumstances established trafficking under s2 DDA or statutory presumption under s37(da)

Ratio Decidendi

The oral information given by the accused in custody was admissible under s27 and, together with the keys, conduct of leading police and chain of custody, established actual and exclusive possession and knowledge of the drugs; statutory presumption under s37(da) applied to MDMA and Methamphetamine and was not rebutted on the balance of probabilities; trafficking established for other drugs by evidence of concealment, quantities and manufacturing implements; s39B(2A)(d) was not satisfied so no basis to avoid mandatory sentencing under s39B(2); conviction entered on all five charges and death sentence imposed for charges 1–4 and fixed imprisonment and whipping for charge 5.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on all five charges; death sentence imposed for Charges 1 to 4; ten years imprisonment and ten strokes imposed for Charge 5.

Orders

  • Accused sentenced to death for First, Second, Third and Fourth charges pursuant to s39B(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952
  • Accused sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment and 10 strokes for Fifth charge under s6 read with s39A(2) Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, term to run from date of arrest