Abdul Malik Ishak JC:

[1] The three accused were jointly charged on an amended charge as follows:

Bahawa kamu dituduh bersama-sama pada 17 Februari 1990 jam lebih kurang pukul 10.00 malam di rumah No 52, Lorong 3, Taman Sri Larut, Simpang di dalam Daerah Larut dan Matang di dalam Negeri Perak Danil Ridzuan dengan niat bersama kamu bertiga, telah memiliki dadah berbahaya ia itu 1430 kartus ganja seberat 353.82 gram dan oleh itu kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan di bawah s 6 Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 Akta 234 dan boleh dihukum di bawah s 39A(2) Akta yang sama dibaca bersama s 34 Kanun Kesiksaan.

[2] The first and the third accused pleaded guilty to the amended charge on 2 July 1993. The Court took pains to ensure that the amended charge was read and explained to them individually. They individually elected to plead guilty to the reduced charge and understood the nature and consequences of their plea.

[3] The typewritten facts (exhibit (P1)) were read individually to the first and the third accused persons and the Court then asked each of them whether they understood the facts and whether they agreed to it. They were again asked whether they still maintained their plea of guilt. The Court having satisfied itself that they understood the nature and consequences of their plea, forthwith recorded their plea of guilt and convicted them accordingly.

[4] The first accused was sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment with effect from the date of his arrest (17 February 1990) and ordered to receive 10 strokes of the rattan. He was also ordered to undergo his term of imprisonment at Kajang Prisons.

[5] The third accused was sentenced to 6 years' imprisonment with effect from the date of his arrest (17 February 1990) and ordered to receive 10 strokes of the rattan. He was ordered to undergo his term of imprisonment at Alor Setar Prisons.

[6] The learned Deputy Public Prosecutor withdrew the amended charge against second accused and the Court accordingly acquitted and discharged him forthwith.

[7] Briefly, the facts as extracted from the typewritten facts (exhibit (P1)), would show that at the time of the raid on house No 52, Lorong 3, Taman Sri Larut, Simpang, Taiping, only the wife of the first accused was present. She allowed the police to search the interior portion of the house whereupon the incriminating drugs were found in the kitchen portion, tucked in the drain, which was covered with a piece of plank. The police then waited for the return of her husband - the first accused.

[8] At about 12.00 midnight, all the three accused persons returned home and they were placed under arrest. Investigations revealed that the house was occupied by the first accused and his wife together with the third accused.

[9] Counsel for each of the accused then made their plea in mitigation.

First Accused

[10] The first accused was said to be 33 years old, married about a year ago. His wife, who was arrested with him then, was in her late stage of pregnancy and while in custody, she gave birth to a baby boy. Urged the Court to take note that he has pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity, a very strong mitigating factor. A great deal of time and expense had been saved from an otherwise long and ardous trial. Reminded the Court, as an analogy, that even a plea of guilty of a hardened criminal must be treated as a mitigating factor. The case of Sau Soo Kim v. PP, [1975] 2 MLJ 134 was referred to Counsel pointed out that the first accused pleaded guilty as his wife was not charged, even though she was found alone in the said house, at the material time. The non-charging of the wife by the prosecution motivated the first accused to plead guilty to the amended charge. His wife is currently selling nasi lemak. She has, so submitted Counsel, suffered tremendously. Urged the Court to impose a short custodial sentence to enable him to return to his wife and son as soon as possible. Requested the Court to order him to serve his sentence at Kajang Prisons.

Third