SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 MarsdenLR 2055

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
PP – Appellant
Versus
KHAIRIL ANWAR ABDUL RAHIM – Respondent


Table of Content
1. appeal based on sentence inadequacy under drug laws. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. facts surrounding the drug charges and respondent's arrest. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. arguments from dpp and respondent concerning sentencing. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. court discusses sentencing guidelines and public interest. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 19 , 20)
Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal JCA:

[1] This is an appeal by the PP against the inadequacy of sentence passed by the High Court at Shah Alam on the respondent. The respondent was initially charged with an offence under s 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ("the Act"). Subsequently, the prosecution tendered an alternative charge under s 6 punishable under s 39A(2) of the same Act for possession of 534.12 grams of cannabis in front of house No 16B, Jalan Pandan Indah 4/30, Pandan Indah, Kuala Lumpur ("the alternative charge"). The respondent also faced another charge of possession of 6.67 grams cannabis at the same place, an offence under s 6 of the Act.

[2] The respondent pleaded guilty to both the alternative charge and the charge under s 6 of the Act. For the alternative charge, the respondent was sentenced to 8 years' imprison

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top