RAGUNATHAN A/L THANGIAH v Pendakwa Raya

j-05sh-453-09-2024 Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) 8 July 2025 • J-05(SH)-453-09/2024 • 26 min read
17 cases cited (0 SG, 17 foreign)

Catchwords

Seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 - pembuktian milikan, jagaan dan kawalan serta pengetahuan terhadap dadah - Perayu mempunyai kuasa untuk mengendalikan dadah sebagai pemilik, dengan mengecualikan orang lain - dadah dijumpai hasil daripada tunjuk arah oleh Perayu - Kunci premis tempat dadah ditemui berada di dalam poket seluar Perayu - sama ada rantaian keterangan telah terputus - dadah lewat dihantar oleh pihak polis ke Jabatan Kimia untuk dianalisa - anggapan statutori di bawah Seksyen 37(da) ADB 1952 - anggapan bertentangan di bawah Seksyen 114(g) Akta Keterangan 1950 - kegagalan pihak pendakwaan untuk memanggil suspek-suspek yang direman bersama Perayu sebagai saksi - kelakuan Perayu menunjukkan Perayu mempunyai perhubungan langsung (“clear nexus”) dengan dadah - Seksyen 8 Akta Keterangan 1950 - fakta yang membawa kepada penemuan dadah (leading to discovery) - sabitan ke atas Perayu adalah selamat walaupun dengan ketiadaan keterangan forensik

Practice Areas

Seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952

Judges (3)

Azman bin Abdullah Delivered Lim Chong Fong Coram Lim Hock Leng Coram

Counsel (5)

Gabriel Susayan and Partners Firm Faiz Taqiuddin Counsel Appellant Gabriel Susayan Counsel Appellant Sarannya Subramaniam Counsel Appellant Siti Rafidah Binti Zainuddin Counsel Prosecution

Parties (2)

Pendakwa Raya Respondent Ragunathan a/l Thangiah Appellant

Case Significance

RAGUNATHAN A/L THANGIAH v Pendakwa Raya is a Court of Appeal (Mahkamah Rayuan) decision dated July 8, 2025 (citation: j-05sh-453-09-2024). <p>The appellant faced three related drug trafficking appeals heard together, involving charges under s.39B(1)(a) and s.12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 for methamphetamine found at premises he led police to via pointing-out. The key issues included proof of possession, custody and knowledge of the drugs, the chain of evidence, and the failure to call co-suspects as prosecution witnesses. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed all appeals against conviction and sentence.</p> The panel comprised Azman bin Abdullah, Lim Chong Fong and Lim Hock Leng, with Azman bin Abdullah delivering the judgment. Counsel appearing: Faiz Taqiuddin (counsel for appellant), Gabriel Susayan (counsel for appellant), Sarannya Subramaniam (counsel for appellant), Siti Rafidah Binti Zainuddin (prosecution counsel).

Summary

The appellant faced three related drug trafficking appeals heard together, involving charges under s.39B(1)(a) and s.12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 for methamphetamine found at premises he led police to via pointing-out. The key issues included proof of possession, custody and knowledge of the drugs, the chain of evidence, and the failure to call co-suspects as prosecution witnesses. The Court of Appeal unanimously dismissed all appeals against conviction and sentence.

What was the outcome of RAGUNATHAN A/L THANGIAH v Pendakwa Raya?

<p>The appellant faced three related drug trafficking appeals heard together, involving charges under s.39B(1)(a) and s.12(2) of the Dangerous Drugs A...

Cases Cited (17)

MY (17)
[1966] 1 MLJ 116 [1987] 1 CLJ 250 [1987] 1 MLJ 492 [1996] 1 MLJ 209 [1997] 1 CLJ 233 [2006] 3 CLJ 597 [2008] 4 CLJ 431 [2009] 2 MLJ 194 [2011] 4 CLJ 113 [2011] MLJU 1491 [2013] 3 MLJ 630 [2013] 4 CLJ 149 [2014] 1 CLJ 433 [2017] 1 CLJ 575 [2018] MLJU 601 [2022] MLJU 1031 [2025] MLJU 35