Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Presumption under section 37(d)

Legal area

Court

29 Oct 2024

[ ] 1. ) Ngoforo Ebube Gospel (Nigeria) 2. ) Nelson Oguchukwu Chukwumeka (Nigeria)

Citation

BA-45A-53-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-53-08/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

Accused 1: prosecution proved custody and control of bag P12 found in his vehicle and CCTV showed the bag being placed into his car and his conduct thereafter; s37(d) presumption applied and Accused 1 failed to rebut on balance of probabilities or raise reasonable doubt about knowledge, quantity pointed to trafficking; conviction under s39B(1)(a) followed. Accused 2: prosecution failed to prove identity of the person in CCTV as Accused 2, lacked forensic linkage and uninterrupted chain of custody and did not make out a prima facie case; Accused 2 acquitted and discharged.
20 Oct 2023

[ ] Miss Narutumon Kumbungkla

Citation

BA-45A-119-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

BA-45A-119-12/2019 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court applied the presumption under s37(d) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 because the drugs were found in a checked-in bag which the accused had custody and control of (bag tag, CCTV and handling at carousel), the accused failed to rebut that presumption on the balance of probabilities, and the elements of trafficking (including 'carrying') were established; therefore the accused was convicted of trafficking and sentenced accordingly.