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



JUDGMENT

Vincent Ng Kim Khoay J: The accused was charged as follows:

Bahawa kamu pada 11 Ogos 1987 jam lebih kurang 5.30 pagi di Jambatan Permatang Tok Labu, Kepala Batas, Seberang Perai, dalam Daerah Butterworth, di dalam Negeri Pulau Pinang, telah mengedar dadah berbahaya iaitu 70,952.1 gram ganja dan kamu telah melakukan suatu kesalahan di bawah s. 39B (1) (a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (Semakan 1980) dan boleh dihukum di bawah s. 39B(2) Akta yang sama.

This case was first heard on 4 November 1992. The prosecution called and led evidence from nine witnesses. The nature and salient details of their evidence is as I have narrated in my earlier judgment (my said judgment) delivered on 27 November 1992 [see PP v. Alcontara [1992] 1 MLJ 140] which I do not propose to repeat here.

At the close of the prosecution case Mr. Karpal Singh, for the accused, took up only one point in his submission that the defence should not be called, namely that considering the evidence of the Government Chemist Encik Tai Teik Siew (PW1) in the light of the Supreme Court's decision in Loo Keck Leong v. PP [1992] 3 CLJ 1332 , the essential ingredient of the charge - being that the plant material seized wa

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