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

2013 MarsdenLR 2327

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
AHMAD MUKAMAL ABDUL WAHAB & ORS – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent


Petitioner Advocates:Bernard George ,Respondent Advocate: Shoba Venu Gobal

Table of Content
1. appellants charged with drug trafficking. (Para 1)
2. appellants' involvement in drug trafficking (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
3. assessment of evidence for the 2nd appellant (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. legal standards for evaluating defense and prosecution evidence (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)

[1] We heard all the 3 appeals of the appellants/accused on 11 January 2013, and on the same day, dismissed the 1st and 3rd appellant's appeal and allowed the 2nd appellant's appeal. My learned brothers, Mohamed Apandi bin Haji Ali JCA and Linton Albert JCA, have read the judgment in draft form and approved the same. This is our judgment in respect of appeal No: C-05-44-2011. It must be noted that there is only one appeal number for all the 3 appeals.

Brief Facts

[2] The appellants were charged for trafficking dangerous drugs under s 39B(1) (a) DDA 1952 , to be read with s 34. The said charge reads as follows:

"Bahawa kamu, bersama-sama pada 9 Mac 2010, lebih kurang jam 12:30 tengah malam, di kawasan tempat letak kereta R&R Genting Sempah, dalam daerah Bentong, di dalam Negeri Pahang, telah didapati mengedar dadah berbahaya jenis cannabis seberat 4,521 gram, dan dengan itu, kamu telah melakukan suatu ke

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