PP v Tan Siew Lam: Trafficking of Morphine & Knowledge of Drug Possession under Misuse of Drugs Act
In Public Prosecutor v Tan Siew Lam and Another, the High Court of Singapore, presided over by Judicial Commissioner Amarjeet Singh on August 4, 2000, found Tan Siew Lam and Anand Naidu guilty of drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Tan Siew Lam was charged with possessing morphine for the purpose of trafficking, while Anand Naidu was charged with giving the morphine to Tan Siew Lam. The court determined that both accused failed to rebut the presumptions against them under the Misuse of Drugs Act, leading to their conviction.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Guilty as charged
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Tan Siew Lam and Anand Naidu were charged with drug trafficking. The court found both accused guilty, determining they failed to rebut presumptions under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Guilty as charged | Won | David Khoo of Attorney-General’s Chambers Leon Loh of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Anand Naidu a/l Raman | Defendant | Individual | Guilty as charged | Lost | |
| Tan Siew Lam | Defendant | Individual | Guilty as charged | Lost | Michael S Chia of AC Tan Teow Yeow of AC |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Amarjeet Singh | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| David Khoo | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Leon Loh | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Anand Nalachandran | AC |
| Subhas Anandan | Briefed |
| Gloria James | AC |
| Michael S Chia | AC |
| Tan Teow Yeow | AC |
4. Facts
- The 1st Accused was seen taking delivery of an orange plastic bag from the 2nd Accused.
- The orange plastic bag contained three packets of morphine with a net weight of 62.26 grams.
- The 1st Accused admitted to expecting heroin and that drug paraphernalia found in his flat belonged to him.
- The 2nd Accused claimed he was delivering the bag as a favor and did not know it contained drugs.
- The 2nd Accused lied to CNB officers about the circumstances of the delivery.
- A phone call was made from a public telephone to the 1st Accused's mobile phone shortly before the arrest.
- The 1st Accused admitted in his oral statement that there were 4 packets of heroin in the orange plastic bag and that they belonged to him.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Tan Siew Lam and Another, CC 51/2000, [2000] SGHC 161
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1st Accused possessed morphine for trafficking purposes. | |
| 2nd Accused gave morphine to the 1st Accused. | |
| 1st Accused arrested with orange plastic bag. | |
| 2nd Accused arrested. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Drug Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found both accused guilty of drug trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Possession of controlled drugs
- Trafficking of controlled drugs
- Knowledge of drug possession
- Presumption of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court held that the accused failed to rebut the presumption of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Rebuttal of presumption
- Possession for the purpose of trafficking
- Knowledge of Drug Possession
- Outcome: The court determined that the 2nd accused's wilful blindness equated to knowledge of drug possession.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Wilful blindness
- Inference of knowledge
- Related Cases:
- [1978 – 1979] SLR 211
- [1980] 1MLJ 49
- [1969] 256
- [1981] QB 720
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Sentencing according to law
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
- Possession of Controlled Drugs
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tan Ah Tee & Anor v P P | Court of Criminal Appeal | Yes | [1978 – 1979] SLR 211 | Singapore | Endorsed the ratio of Lord Pearce in R v Warner regarding the knowledge of the nature of the drug concerned in drug possession cases. |
| Tan Ah Tee & Anor v P P | Court of Criminal Appeal | Yes | [1980] 1MLJ 49 | Singapore | Endorsed the ratio of Lord Pearce in R v Warner regarding the knowledge of the nature of the drug concerned in drug possession cases. |
| R v Warner | N/A | Yes | [1969] 256 | N/A | Cited for the principle that 'possession' is satisfied by knowledge of the existence of the thing itself, not its qualities, and ignorance or mistake as to its qualities is not an excuse. |
| Lucas | N/A | Yes | [1981] QB 720 | N/A | Cited for the principle that lies can corroborate the prosecution's version of events. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act, Cap 185 | Singapore |
| s 5(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act, Cap 185 | Singapore |
| s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act, Cap 185 | Singapore |
| s 17(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 18 of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 2(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Morphine
- Trafficking
- Possession
- Wilful Blindness
- Presumption
- Controlled Drug
- CNB
- Drug Paraphernalia
- Ang Pow
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Morphine
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- Misuse of Drugs Act
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 60 |
| Criminal Procedure | 50 |
| Offences | 40 |
| Evidence | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Offences
- Statutory Interpretation