Abdul Hamid Omar LP:

This appeal by Pang Chee Meng is against his conviction and sentence by the learned Judicial Commissioner sitting at Kuala Lumpur on a charge as follows:

Bahawa kamu pada 12 September 1987 jam lebih kurang 2.10 pagi di rumah No. 13F Jalan Kalong off Jalan Sungei Besi, di dalam Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur, di dalam Wilayah Persekutuan telah mengedar dadah berbahaya, iaitu 353.86 gram heroin dan oleh yang demikian kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan di bawah s. 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (Disemak 1980) dan boleh dihukum di bawah s. 39B(2) Akta yang sama.

Karpal Singh appearing on behalf of the appellant urged that the appeal be allowed and the conviction set aside principally on ground that the learned Judge was wrong in admitting a statement made by the appellant in answer to a question put to him by Inspector Kamaruddin (PW1) as information admissible under s. 27 of the Evidence Act. Karpal Singh contended that (a) the said information had not been the subject of a contemporaneous record and (b) there were serious contradictions in the evidence of PW1 and PW6 in regard to the statement to justify the admission of such evidence as information lead