Pendakwa Raya v MUZAFFAR BIN ZAABA

Case Significance

Illustrates how a statutory presumption of possession under section 37(d) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 can be displaced at the defence stage where the accused raises a reasonable doubt about his connection to the drugs and the place they were found.

This High Court decision at Shah Alam is one of a set of related drug prosecutions against two accused tried together, arising from drugs found both in a residential unit and in a vehicle, and this file concerns a charge faced by the first accused. Across the linked cases the two accused faced charges under seksyen 39B Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952) together with seksyen 12(2) (section 12(2)) of the same Act, the first accused being charged in several files and the second accused in one, with a further charge laid against both jointly. The decisive stage in this file was the close of the defence case, where the question was whether the accused had rebutted the statutory presumption of possession that operates once the prosecution proves custody or control of the premises or receptacle in which drugs are found. The central factual controversy across the files was the location of the drugs, some found in a residential unit and some in a vehicle, and whether the connection between the first accused and those locations was sufficient to fix him with possession and to sustain the section 37(d) presumption. Having considered the whole of the evidence adduced through the trial, including at the defence stage, the court held that the defence had succeeded in rebutting the presumption under section 37(d) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, so that possession was not established to the required standard. On that footing the court discharged and acquitted the first accused on the charge under this file. The judgment is a useful illustration of how a statutory presumption of possession, though it may be raised by proof of control of the place where drugs are found, can be displaced at the defence stage where the accused raises a reasonable doubt about his connection to the drugs and their location.