PENDAKWARAYA 1) VIJAYAN A/L RAMIAH (NO.K/P: 681108-02-5039) 2) DEVAPALAN A/L SANTHRASEKARAN (NO.K/P: 860806-38-6409) 3) KEVIN A/L SARANGAPANI (NO.K/P: 880930-07-5059)

PENDAKWARAYA 1) VIJAYAN A/L RAMIAH (NO.K/P: 681108-02-5039) 2) DEVAPALAN A/L SANTHRASEKARAN (NO.K/P: 860806-38-6409) 3) KEVIN A/L SARANGAPANI (NO.K/P: 880930-07-5059)

Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case because it did not establish, beyond reasonable doubt at the prima facie stage, that each accused had possession (care, control and knowledge) of the methamphetamine and the chain of custody for the exhibits was not satisfactorily established; proximity and unexplained custody gaps therefore required acceptance of inferences favourable to the accused and mandated discharge.

Citation
PA-45A-17-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Vijayan a/l Ramiah; Defendant: Devapalan a/l Santhrasekaran; Defendant: Kevin a/l Sarangapani
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 October 2021
Case Number
PA-45A-17-03/2018 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (drug Trafficking) / End of Prosecution Case Ruling on Prima Facie
Outcome
Accused 1 (Vijayan a/l Ramiah), Accused 2 (Devapalan a/l Santhrasekaran) and Accused 3 (Kevin a/l Sarangapani) acquitted and discharged
Legal Topics
Possession, Chain of Custody, Prima Facie Standard, Forensic Analysis, Statutory Presumptions (s.37 Akta 234), Section 39 B Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Narcotics Law Evidence Law Criminal Procedure Possession Chain of Custody Prima Facie Standard Forensic Analysis +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 4 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Vijayan a/l Ramiah

Defendant

Devapalan a/l Santhrasekaran

Defendant

Kevin a/l Sarangapani

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal (drug Trafficking) / End of Prosecution Case Ruling on Prima Facie

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case of possession and trafficking against each accused
  2. 2 Whether chain of custody for seized exhibits was intact
  3. 3 Whether proximity to the drugs suffices to prove possession for each accused

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to prove a prima facie case because it did not establish, beyond reasonable doubt at the prima facie stage, that each accused had possession (care, control and knowledge) of the methamphetamine and the chain of custody for the exhibits was not satisfactorily established; proximity and unexplained custody gaps therefore required acceptance of inferences favourable to the accused and mandated discharge.

Court Disposition

Accused 1 (Vijayan a/l Ramiah), Accused 2 (Devapalan a/l Santhrasekaran) and Accused 3 (Kevin a/l Sarangapani) acquitted and discharged

Orders

  • Accused are acquitted and discharged without being called to enter their defence