COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MEGALANATHAN MARIAPPAN – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Introduction
[1] The appellant was charged in the Magistrates Court under s 12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 ('DDA 1952'), which is punishable under s 39A(2) of the same Act. He was found guilty and sentenced to four years of imprisonment commencing from the date of conviction, along with four strokes of whipping. He appealed to the High Court , but his appeal was unsuccessful, as the Court dismissed it and upheld the conviction and sentence imposed by the Magistrates' Court .
[2] The appellant subsequently sought leave to appeal under s 50(2) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964. The legal question presented was:
"Presumption tidak dinyatakan diakhir kes pendakwaan, samada keputusan Mahkamah Majistret tersebut betul ataupun boleh dibangkitkan semula."
Essentially, the legal question was whether the Magistrate Court 's decision was correct since it did not state the presumption at the conclusion of the prosecution's case. The appellant was granted leave, leading to this appeal.
Brief Facts
[3] The charge against the appellant read as follows:
"Bahawa kamu pada 5 July 2018 jam lebih kurang 1.20 tengahari di hadapan bengkel pusat servis kenderaan
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.