MODJTABA HOSSEINZADEH MAJID vs PP & ANOTHER APPEALS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2015 MarsdenLR 1048

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MODJTABA HOSSEINZADEH MAJID – Appellant
Versus
PP & ANOTHER APPEALS – Respondent

Table of Content
1. initial detention and inspection revealed suspicious behavior. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. defence hinges on lack of knowledge of the drugs. (Para 11 , 12 , 18)
3. arguments cover the legality of the charge and need for consent. (Para 14 , 31 , 32)
4. circumstantial evidence supports findings of drug trafficking. (Para 53 , 54 , 56)
5. conclusion and affirming the trial court’s findings. (Para 68 , 69)

Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim JCA:

Brief Facts Of The Case

[1] On 6 February 2011, ASP Balachandran a/l Annamalai ("SP5") was on supervisory duty at the KLIA Arrival Hall, Level 3. At about 10 am 2 men were seen wandering around in suspicious manner. He spent about 5 minutes observing both of them.

[2] He then saw them coming towards the scanning machine with their bags, on their way out. After they had passed their bags through the scanning machine, SP5 then approached them and introduced himself as a police officer together with 3 other police personnel, to the 2 men. Then SP5 went on to check their passports. A body inspection was also done on the 2 men but nothing suspicious was found on them, neither in their bags.

[3] Upon instruction by SP5, both the men were brought to Hospit

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2015 MarsdenLR 1048

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYAMODJTABA HOSSEINZADEH MAJID – AppellantVersusPP & ANOTHER APPEALS – Respondent

Cases Referred (3)

COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
MODJTABA HOSSEINZADEH MAJID – Appellant
Versus
PP & ANOTHER APPEALS – Respondent