PP vs VINOD RAJ UTHAYAKUMAR - 2019 MarsdenLR 2352

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 MarsdenLR 2352

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
PP – Appellant
Versus
VINOD RAJ UTHAYAKUMAR – Respondent

Petitioner Advocates:Mohd Radzi Abdul Razak ,Respondent Advocate: S Narashiman Subramaniam

Table of Content
1. discussion and court obligations regarding evidence. (Para 1 , 19)
2. charge details concerning alleged drug trafficking. (Para 2)
3. defendant was accused of trafficking cannabis. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 21)
4. application to admit witness statement under s 32(1)(i) ea. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
5. witness statements sought to be admitted under legal provisions. (Para 13 , 14)
6. establishing prima facie case regarding drug classification. (Para 34 , 36 , 37 , 38)

Collin Lawrence Sequerah J:

Introduction

[1] The accused above named was charged for the following:

"Bahawa kamu pada 12 February 2018 jam lebih kurang 9.40 malam di hadapan lif Tingkat 10, Blok B, PPR Kg Baru, Air Panas, Setapak, dalam daerah Wangsa Maju, Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur telah didapati mengedar dadah berbahaya iaitu cannabis seberat 237 gram. Oleh itu kamu telah melakukan kesalahan dibawah s 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 yang boleh dihukum dibawah s 39B(2) Akta yang sama."

Facts Of The Case

[2] The pertinent facts of the prosecution case reveal that on 12 February 2018, SP3 led a team of policemen from the Narcotics Department from IPD Wangsa Maju to Blok B PPR Kg Baru Air Panas upon recei

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 MarsdenLR 2352

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPURPP – AppellantVersusVINOD RAJ UTHAYAKUMAR – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
PP – Appellant
Versus
VINOD RAJ UTHAYAKUMAR – Respondent