Pendakwa Raya v 1. ) OOI TAIT BENG 2. ) SUKANYA JANRAYUM

Case Significance

Explains the sentencing of an accused who pleaded guilty to a reduced charge under section 12(2)/39A(2) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, imposing nine years' imprisonment (no caning, the accused being a woman under section 289(a) CPC) with regard to the seriousness of the original trafficking charge and the early plea.

This High Court (Alor Setar) decision sets out the grounds of sentence following a plea of guilty to a reduced charge in a dangerous-drugs prosecution. The two accused had originally been jointly charged under seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952), read with seksyen 34 Kanun Keseksaan (section 34 of the Penal Code), for trafficking in 435.5 grams of methamphetamine on 6 February 2022 at Alor Setar, an offence punishable under section 39B(2). Following representations, the Pendakwa Raya (the Public Prosecutor) offered an alternative charge under seksyen 12(2) of the Act, punishable under seksyen 39A(2), on condition that the second accused plead guilty.

These grounds concern the sentencing of the second accused, who pleaded guilty to the alternative charge. In mitigation the second accused sought the minimum term of five years' imprisonment, relying on the early plea of guilty when the alternative charge was offered, being a first offender, personal circumstances, and the recent sentencing trend said to fall between six and nine years' imprisonment.

The court imposed a sentence of nine years' imprisonment from the date of arrest, and did not order caning, since the second accused was a woman and was therefore exempt from caning under section 289(a) of the Criminal Procedure Code. In arriving at the term the court took into account that, by pleading guilty to the alternative charge, the accused had escaped the possibility of the death penalty attaching to the original trafficking charge, and it referred to the approach in PP lwn Ismail Ahmad, where the court observed that an early plea to a reduced charge saved the accused from the possibility of the death sentence but that regard must still be had to the seriousness of the original offence. The court concluded that the sentence imposed on the second accused was appropriate and reasonable and not manifestly excessive.