The court affirmed that the presumption of trafficking under the Dangerous Drugs Act remains if the accused fails to rebut it, supported by credible prosecution evidence.

Celestina Stuel Galid J:

Introduction

[1] The accused was charged for trafficking in 327.6 grams of methamphetamine under s 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ("the DDA ").

[2] The charge reads as follows:

"Bahawa kamu, pada 02 haribulan Januari 2023, jam lebih kurang 11.30 malam, bertempat di tepi Jalan Utara, Batu 3, di dalam daerah Sandakan, di dalam Negeri Sabah, telah mengedar dadah berbahaya iaitu Methamphetamine seberat 327.6 gram dan dengan itu kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahan di bawah s 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 yang boleh dihukum di bawah s 39B(2) Akta yang sama."

The Prosecution's Narrative Of The Case

[3] Having received a tip-off earlier, on 2 January 2023, the raiding officer (PW4), assembled a team of police personnel and went to the location where the drug trafficking activity was said to occur at the entrance of the road leading to the squatters area at Jalan Utara, Batu 3, Sandakan.

[4] PW4 and his team arrived there at about 2315 hours and after about 10 minutes of surveillance, they saw a lone man acting suspiciously in that he was walking hurriedly from the squatters area towards the road while cautiously looking left and right. He was carrying a backpack on him.

[5] When PW4 and his team approached the man and stating that they were the police, he attempted to flee by going back from where he came from but was apprehended by PW4 and his team. PW4 identified the man in court as the accused.

[6] PW4 said he administered the caution under s 37B(1) of the DDA before he conducted a body search on the accused and checked the contents of the backpack which had the words "UNDER ARMOUR" written on it.

[7] In the backpack, PW4 found one black plastic bag which contained a multi coloured and clear plastic packet with the words "ZIP BAG" written on it which contained crystalline substances suspected to be methamphetamine. The backpack also contained a black bag with the words "MORE THAN PROTECTION" written on it containing the birth certificate of Jabrin bin Addin.

[8] The accused was later arrested and when the crystalline substances were sent for analysis at Jabatan Kimia Malaysia, they were confirmed to contain 327.6 grams of methamphetamine.

[9] The accused was later charged for drug trafficking.

Prima Prima Facie

[10] The law at the end of the prosecution's case is settled. The court is to subject the prosecution's evidence to a maximum evaluation to satisfy itself whether a prima facie case has been made out of the charge against the accused person so that the accused is to be called to answer and defend the charge - see s 180 of the Criminal Procedure Code (" CPC "), PP v. Mohd Radzi Abu Bakar 2005 MarsdenLR 2061 ; 2005 MarsdenLR 2778 ; 2006 MarsdenLR 2923 ; , Balachandran v. PP 2004 MarsdenLR 804 ; 2005 MarsdenLR 2256 ; ; and Looi Kow Chai & Anor v. PP 2002 MarsdenLR 1240 ; 2003 MarsdenLR 1502 ; ; .

[11] The elements to be proved in the present case were:

(i) That the subject matter concerned was 327.6 grams of methamphetamine;

(ii) That the accused had possession and knowledge of the subject matter; and

(iii) That the accused did, at the place, time and date stated in the charge against him, traffic in the subject matter.

First Element - The Subject Matter Concerned Was 327.6 Grams Of Methamphetamine

[12] In her witness statement, the chemist, PW1 included her curriculum vitae showing her extensive educational and professional qualification and experience, all of which were not challenged by the defence. That being the case, there was no reason for this court not to have accepted PW1's evidence as that of an expert witness within the meaning of s 45 of the Evidence Act 1950 .

[13] PW1 testified having received in good condition, the case exhibits for analysis on 13 January 2023 from the investigating officer (PW3). In court, she identified the envelope in which the exhibits were sent to her as with the Polis 31 form (P1) and the receipt she issued (P2) and the chemist report which she