The court upheld that the preparatory acts for drug trafficking are sufficient for conviction under the Dangerous Drugs Act when supported by overwhelming evidence.

[1] In the High Court at Alor Setar Kedah the 3 appellants together with 3 others were charged with an offence of doing an act preparatory to trafficking in dangerous drugs, an offence under s 39B(1)(c) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ('the DDA '). The charge against them is as follows:

"Bahawa kamu pada 09 Julai 2006 jam lebih kurang 4.00 petang, di Kilang ZMAS SYNERGY Sdn Bhd, Plot 935, Lorong Makmur 13/1, Taman Makmur, Lunas, dalam Negeri Kedah Darul Aman, dalam lanjutan dari niat bersama, telah melakukan suatu perbuatan sebagai persediaan bagi tujuan mengedar dadah berbahaya iaitu Methamphetamine seberat 368,126.26 gram, dan dengan itu kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan di bawah s 39B(1)(c), ADB 1952 yang boleh dihukum di bawah s 39B(2) Akta yang sama dibaca bersama s 34 Kanun Kesiksaan."

[2] The appellants were the 1^st, 3^rd and 6^th accused respectively at the trial. They are in fact father, son and daughter in that order. At the conclusion of the trial all three were found guilty and sentenced to death. The other three accused were acquitted and discharged as the learned trial judge accepted their defence.

[3] The facts in so far as they are relevant for purposes of this appeal are as follows. On 9 July 2006 at about 4.00 pm ASP Howe Sye Eng (SP7) of the Bukit Aman police led a party of 18 personnel to conduct a raid on a factory under the style and name of Zmas Synergy Sdn Bhd which was suspected to be used as a clandestine drug processing laboratory. When SP7 and his party arrived, the gate was closed but not locked. However, to gain entry to the office they had to break the glass door as it was closed.

[4] Once inside the office they arrested 3 of the 6 accused in the living hall including the 3^rd appellant. The 1^st appellant was arrested by another officer at the platform where 18 reactors were located while the 2^nd appellant was arrested in a room on the ground floor of the factory. The other accused was arrested near the reactor platform on the lower floor. Other than these 6 persons there were no other persons inside the factory.

[5] According to SP7 the reactors in the factory were operational as he could hear the system running. The chemist's (SP6) testimony in this regard is that each of these 18 reactors was equipped with a boiler, cooling system, vacuum and scrubber. SP7 then proceeded to carry out checks in the factory in the presence of all the accused and seized items as detailed in the Search Lists at exhibits P198-P204 which he himself prepared. Altogether 110 items were seized by SP7 from the factory including personal items belonging to the 6 accused persons.

[6] The following day, ie on 10 July 2006 the chemist Shaharudin bin Hassan (SP6) visited the factory to carry out inspection accompanied by the Investigating Officer DSP Ismail bin Hj Abu (SP15). It took him 6 days to carry out the inspection. What he did and found at the factory during the 6 day inspection is described in detail in his oral evidence in Court and in his Chemist Report at exh P157 (p 788-812 of the appeal record).

[7] From the samples that SP6 took from the factory he found the various items to contain 368,126.26 grams of methamphetamine, a dangerous drug listed in the First Schedule (Part III) of the DDA . The crucial part of SP6's evidence is that the factory was used as an illegal laboratory to produce methamphetamine. He had explained both in his oral evidence and in his Chemist Report why he came to the conclusion that the factory was used for such activity. For ease of reference we reproduce bel