Nizammul Hayat Bin Zainal Abidin v Public Prosecutor

Appellant(s): Nizammul Hayat Bin Zainal Abidin

Respondent(s): Pendakwa Raya

• YA Dato' Paduka Azman Bin Abdullah
• YA Datuk Mohamed Zaini Bin Mazlan
• YA Datuk Noorin binti Badaruddin

• The appellant was charged under section 39B(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 (DDA) for trafficking 320.40 grams of cannabis.
• The High Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him to life imprisonment and twelve strokes of whipping, leading to the present appeal against both conviction and sentence.
• Drugs were recovered from a small table outside the appellant's house and from a drawer in a room within the house, which the appellant led police to and which was identified as his.

• Whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case, particularly regarding alleged material contradictions and the proof of custody, control, and exclusivity of the drugs.
• Whether the failure to administer caution under section 37B(1)(b) of the DDA 1952 rendered the appellant's act of directing the police to the drugs inadmissible or unsafe to rely upon.
• Whether the element of trafficking under section 39B of the DDA 1952 was proven beyond reasonable doubt, including the proper invocation and rebuttal of statutory presumptions.

• The Court affirmed the High Court's finding of a prima facie case, holding that minor inconsistencies did not negate the cogent evidence establishing the appellant's link to the drugs.
• The Court clarified that exclusive occupation is not a legal prerequisite for possession, affirming that custody and control coupled with knowledge, as demonstrated by the appellant's actions, were sufficiently proven.
• The Court ruled that the alleged failure to administer caution did not occasion a miscarriage of justice, as the conviction rested on independent evidence of drug recovery and control, and the statutory presumption of trafficking was correctly invoked and unrebutted.