Pendakwa Raya v CHE HASMIDI BIN CHE HASSAN

Case Significance

Illustrates the individual assessment of each co-accused's liability and the displacement of the statutory possession presumption where the accused raises a reasonable doubt about his connection to drugs found in premises or a vehicle.

This High Court decision at Shah Alam concerns the charge faced by the second accused within a set of related drug prosecutions tried together against two accused, arising from drugs found in a residential unit and a vehicle. While the first accused faced several charges in the linked files and both accused faced a further charge jointly, this file is the individual charge against the second accused, brought under the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, engaging seksyen 39B and seksyen 12(2) (sections 39B and 12(2)) and the presumption of possession under section 37(d). The court's task at the close of the defence case was to decide whether the second accused had rebutted that presumption, the persistent question throughout the trial being whether the evidence connected him to the drugs at the places where they were found. The court's analysis proceeded on the settled basis that each accused's liability must be assessed individually on the evidence referable to him, and that a presumption of possession arising from control of premises or a receptacle may be displaced where the accused raises a reasonable doubt about his custody, control or knowledge of the drugs. Considering the whole of the evidence in relation to the second accused, and in particular the controversy over the location of the drugs and his connection to it, the court held that the defence had succeeded in rebutting the presumption under section 37(d) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. It followed that possession was not established against the second accused to the standard the law requires, and the court discharged and acquitted him on the charge under this file. The judgment is a useful illustration of the individual assessment of each co-accused's liability and of the displacement of the statutory possession presumption where the accused raises a reasonable doubt about his connection to drugs found in premises or a vehicle.