Pendakwa Raya v MUHAMMAD MUHIZAN BIN RAMLI

Case Significance

Illustrates how a prosecution's failure to investigate an exculpatory account raised through its own witnesses can leave a reasonable doubt fatal to a drug-trafficking charge, resulting in a discharge and acquittal at the close of the defence case.

This High Court decision at Alor Setar concerns a drug-trafficking prosecution that failed at the close of the defence case. The accused had been charged that, on 17 August 2017 in a room beside an unnumbered house at Kampung Perupok, Mukim Rambai, in the Pendang district of Kedah, he trafficked 68.8 grams of methamphetamine, an offence under seksyen 39B(1)(a) Akta Dadah Berbahaya 1952 (section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952), punishable under section 39B(2). The prosecution called four witnesses and its case rested principally on the evidence of the raiding officer. At the close of the prosecution case the accused had been called to enter his defence, and the questions for the court were whether a prima facie case had been made out and whether the defence raised a reasonable doubt. The defence pointed to two witnesses, referred to as SD2 and SD3, whose knowledge of the raid the prosecution's own witnesses had disclosed. The court found that the prosecution had known from the outset, through its own witness, of the information those individuals held, yet had made no effort to explain to the court how that knowledge arose, and had conducted no further investigation even after the point was raised and identifications were made. In those circumstances the accused's account could not be dismissed as false or fabricated, and the willingness of those witnesses to be identified and to testify pointed the other way. Applying its maximum evaluation of the evidence, the court held that the prosecution had gagal untuk membuktikan kes tanpa keraguan yang munasabah (failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt) and ordered that the accused be dilepas dan dibebaskan (discharged and acquitted). The judgment illustrates how a failure to investigate an exculpatory account can be fatal to the prosecution at the end of a trafficking trial.