PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Ramendra Krishnan

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Ramendra Krishnan

The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had knowing possession of the specified exhibits and intended to traffic four blocks and 389.84g (80% of one block) while retaining 97.46g (20%) for consumption; amendment of charges under s128(1) CPC was allowed because no prejudice arose and the courier...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2021] SGHC 242
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Ramendra Krishnan
Court
General Division of the High Court
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
25 October 2021
Case Number
HC/CC 22/2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal (misuse of Drugs Act) / Trial Concluded; Convicted on Three Charges; Sentencing Reserved
Outcome
Accused found guilty on all three charges and convicted; sentencing to be determined separately
Legal Topics
Trafficking, Possession, Courier Exception, Charge Amendment Under CPC S128(1), Knowing Possession, Sentencing Implications
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Statutory Offences Drug Law Trafficking Possession Courier Exception Charge Amendment Under CPC S128(1) Knowing Possession +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Ramendra Krishnan

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (misuse of Drugs Act) / Trial Concluded; Convicted on Three Charges; Sentencing Reserved

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the elements of s5(1)(a) read with s5(2) MDA were made out for trafficking four blocks of cannabis
  2. 2 Whether the elements of s5(1)(a) read with s5(2) MDA were made out for trafficking 389.84g (80% of one block)
  3. 3 Whether the elements of s8(a) MDA were made out for possession of 97.46g (20% of one block)

Ratio Decidendi

The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had knowing possession of the specified exhibits and intended to traffic four blocks and 389.84g (80% of one block) while retaining 97.46g (20%) for consumption; amendment of charges under s128(1) CPC was allowed because no prejudice arose and the courier role, even if accepted, is relevant to sentencing only and does not negate criminal liability, therefore guilt on all three charges was established and convictions entered.

Court Disposition

Accused found guilty on all three charges and convicted; sentencing to be determined separately

Orders

  • Convicted of amended first charge: trafficking under s5(1)(a) read with s5(2) MDA in respect of exhibits A1A1A, A1B1A, A1C1A and A1E1A (four blocks)
  • Convicted of second charge: trafficking under s5(1)(a) read with s5(2) MDA in respect of 389.84g of cannabis (80% of exhibit A1D1A)