Ng Chan Keong v Public Prosecutor

Appellant(s): Ng Chan Keong

Respondent(s):

• Pendakwa Raya
• [Pendakwa Raya]

• YA Dato' Azmi Bin Ariffin
• YA Datuk Noorin binti Badaruddin
• YA Datuk Mohd Radzi Bin Abdul Hamid

• The appellant was convicted by the High Court for trafficking 2,782 grammes of methamphetamine under s.39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, after the drugs were found in the boot of a cloned Mercedes-Benz he was driving on the North-South Expressway.
• The appellant fled from police before being stopped, initially claimed the boot was defective, and later denied knowledge of the drugs, asserting he was merely an employee instructed to drive the vehicle from Genting Highlands to Johor Bahru.
• The High Court rejected the defence as an afterthought, found possession established, and invoked the statutory presumption of trafficking under s.37(da) DDA, which the appellant failed to rebut on a balance of probabilities.

• Whether the trial judge erred by failing to make a clear election between direct trafficking under s.2 DDA and presumed trafficking under s.37(da) DDA, thereby creating ambiguity as to the legal basis of conviction.
• Whether possession and knowledge of the dangerous drugs were proved beyond reasonable doubt.
• Whether the chain of custody of the drug exhibits was defective, and whether the defence was properly evaluated in accordance with s.182A of the Criminal Procedure Code and the Radhi direction.

• The Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that the trial judge had made a clear election to rely on the s.37(da) presumption and that the mere descriptive reference to the appellant "transporting" drugs did not constitute an alternative or independent legal basis for conviction, distinguishing cases such as Jorge Crespo Gomez v PP on their facts.
• The Court held that possession and knowledge were established beyond reasonable doubt through the appellant's exclusive control of the vehicle, his evasion of police over approximately two kilometres, his initial reluctance to open the boot, and the large sum of cash found — all constituting circumstantial evidence of guilty knowledge.
• The Court found the chain of custody intact, as all exhibit-handlers testified and the chemist analysed sealed exhibits with corresponding markings; and held that the trial judge's comprehensive rejection of the defence narrative satisfied the Radhi direction, even without an express statement that the defence failed to raise a reasonable doubt.