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

2002 MarsdenLR 2297 ; 2002 MarsdenLR 1

AUGUSTINE PAUL
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR – Appellant
Versus
HASHIM BIN HANAFI – Respondent


Advocates:
Mohd Hamzah bin Ismail (Deputy Public Prosecutor, Attorney General’s Chambers) for the prosecution.
Ameenuddin bin Ibrahim ( Ameen & Co) for the accused.

AUGUSTINE PAUL J::

(1) The charge preferred against the accused in this case is as follows:

Bahawa kamu pada 27 Januari 2001, jam lebih kurang 3.00 pagi di kedai

makan M Rozi Tom Yam, Jalan Bandar Baru Sentul, dalam daerah Sentul,

dalam Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, telah mengedar dadah berbahaya

iaitu 13,767.51g kanabis, oleh yang demikian kamu telah melakukan satu

kesalahan di bawah s 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 dan boleh

dihukum di bawah s 39B(2) Akta yang sama.

(2) On 26 January 2001 at about 11.15pm, Inspector Roslan bin Hussin (‘PW5 ’) led a party of police officers to a restaurant called M Rozi Tom Yam (‘the restaurant’) at Bandar Baru Sentul. There they arrested the accused on suspicion of being involved in drug activities. The restaurant was not searched. After the arrest of the accused, the police party arrested two other male Malays named Mohd Nazary bin Mohd Zaki and Jaafar bin Bebakar. They then returned to the police station. While there, PW5 was informed by Detective Sergeant Zaman that the accused wanted to tell him something. The accused was then brought to PW5 ’s room and questioned. As PW5 said:

Saya ta

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