Pendakwa Raya v 1. ) KON KOK CHEONG 2. ) MISS PAKKAWARUN KOBAYASHI

ba-45-25-05-2025 High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) 25 November 2025 • BA-45-25-05/2025 • 1 min read

Catchwords

Practice Areas

Judges (1)

Parties (3)

Case Significance

A drug-offence sentencing on an early guilty plea to trafficking and possession, balancing the paramount need for deterrence against personal mitigation including the welfare of a young child.

This High Court decision concerns the sentencing of an accused who pleaded guilty at an early stage to charges under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 — trafficking under section 39B(1) and possession under section 12(2) — tried alongside a co-accused. Because the plea admitted the charges, the matter came before the Court as a sentencing exercise, in which the Court had to fix punishments that were just and proportionate to two serious drug offences while weighing the mitigating and personal circumstances placed before it.

The sentencing raised a genuine tension between competing considerations. On one side stood the need to impose a sentence with real deterrent effect — keperluan menjatuhkan hukuman yang memberi kesan pencegahan (the need to impose a sentence that has a preventive effect) — reflecting the gravity of drug trafficking and possession and the public interest in discouraging such offending, an interest that the sentencing regime under section 39B treats as paramount. On the other side stood the personal circumstances of the accused, and in particular the welfare of a young child of the first and second accused, a factor that sentencing courts may take into account when calibrating punishment, though it cannot displace the primacy of deterrence in offences of this seriousness.

The Court's task was therefore to balance the strong public interest in deterrence, and the credit due for an early plea of guilty which spares the court's time and reflects a measure of remorse, against the humane concern for the welfare of a dependent child. The judgment is a useful illustration of how a sentencing court approaches serious drug offences on a guilty plea, and of the limited but real weight that personal mitigation — including responsibility for a young child — carries when set against the deterrent objective that dominates sentencing under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952.

What offences and plea were before the Court?

The accused pleaded guilty at an early stage to charges of trafficking under section 39B(1) and possession under section 12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, so the matter proceeded as a sentencing exercise.

What competing considerations shaped the sentencing?

The Court had to weigh the need for a sentence with real deterrent effect, reflecting the gravity of the drug offences, and the credit due for an early guilty plea, against personal mitigation including the welfare of a young child of the accused, which carries weight but cannot displace the primacy of deterrence.

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official Malaysia Courts portal.

Read on eJudgment

Source: eJudgment (ba-45-25-05-2025)