The court upheld the conviction, emphasizing the sufficiency of evidence establishing knowledge and possession required for trafficking offenses under the Dangerous Drugs Act.

[1] The appellant was charged in the High Court at Shah Alam with an offence under s 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ("the Act"). The charge read as follows:-

"Bahawa kamu pada 24 March 2012, jam lebih kurang 8.15 pagi sehingga jam lebih kurang 6.30 petang, bertempat di tandas Wad 6C, Bilik 27, Hospital Serdang, di dalam Daerah Sepang di dalam Negeri Selangor Darul Ehsan telah memperedarkan dadah berbahaya iaitu Methamphetamine sejumlah berat 509.2 gram dan oleh yang demikian, kamu telah melakukan satu kesalahandi bawah s 39B(1)(a), Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 yang boleh dihukum di bawah s 39B(2) Akta yang sama.".

[2] At the conclusion of the trial, the appellant was found guilty and was accordingly convicted and sentenced to the mandatory death penalty ("the impugned decision").

[3] Being dissatisfied with the impugned decision, the appellant appealed to this Court. Hence, this appeal.

[4] We heard the appeal on 10 January 2017. At the conclusion of arguments, we dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the learned High Court Judge ("the learned Judge"). We now give our reasons.

The Background

The Prosecution's Case

[5] The case brought by the prosecution against the appellant and on which he was convicted may be summarised as follows:

(a) On 23 March 2012, at about 7.05 pm., Insp Sherman Jackson Jon Bosco ("SP6") and his team from Bahagian Siasatan Jenayah Narkotik who had been monitoring then exit doors at Level 3, MTB KLIA Sepang, had arrested the appellant who was on his way out from the Immigration Inspection Counter at Level 3.

(b) The appellant was brought to the Pejabat Jenayah Narkotik, KLIA and thereafter to the Serdang Hospital for an intrusive examination for allegedly concealing drugs in his person.

(c) An X-ray scan was conducted by Norlaili Mohd. Noor ("SP9"). Upon examining the result, Andy Adib Abdul Rahim ("SP8") confirmed that there were capsule-shapes foreign objects in the appellant's abdomen.

(d) The appellant was subsequently detained at Ward 6C Room 27 from 23 March 2012 until 26 March 2012. During that period, the appellant was given medication to flush out those objects. A total of 44 capsules were excreted through the bowel movements of the appellant.

(e) The said capsules were handed over to Koperal Zahid Zakaria ("SP1") and Koperal Hisham Hassan ("SP3") who in turn handed them to the investigating officer of the case, Insp Amrin Mohamad Arif ("SP10"). These capsules were in due course sent by PW10 to the chemist, Puan Norhaya Jaafar ("SP4"), for analysis.

(f) Based upon the examination and analysis of the exhibits, SP4 confirmed and certified that the 44 capsules found excreted from the appellants' bowel contained 509.2 grams of Methamphetamine.

(g) The appellant was then charged under s 39B(1)(a) of the Act.

[6] As for other evidence adduced at trial, we will discuss in greater detail as and when necessary in our disposition of the grounds of appeal.

Findings At The End Of The Prosecution's Case

[7] Having considered the evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned Judge found that the prosecution had successfully established a prima facie case against the appellant of the charge preferred against him.

[8] The crux of the learned Judge's reasoning is as follows:-

"16. Berdasarkan alasan-alasan yang dinyatakan di atas, saya berpuashati pihak pendakwaan telah berjaya membuktikan Tertuduh mempunyai jagaan, kawalan dan pengetahuan ke atas dadah tersebut bagi tujuan pengedaran. Ekoran daripada itu, saya mendapati pihak pendakwaan telah membuktikan suatu kes prima facie terhadap Tertuduh sebagaimana pertuduhan. Oleh i