17 Mar 2023
[Jabatan Kastam Diraja Malaysia (KDRM)] RADHAKRISHNAN A/L RANGASAMY RASU
- Citation
- BH-83-1204-06/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
- Court
- Magistrates' Court
- Case number
- BH-83-1204-06/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
The prosecution proved that the seized liquids were prohibited goods (intoxicating liquor), that the accused was the registered owner and in possession of the goods displayed openly for sale, and that statutory presumptions under s.119 and s.135(2) applied and were not rebutted. The chemist's report, though not using the exact statutory phrase, was a rational opinion based on adequate data and therefore sufficient. The handwritten tenancy agreement was unreliable and parol evidence could not vary its written terms. Therefore the accused was guilty under s.135(1)(d) Customs Act 1967.