Roslan Bin Abdul Rani v Public Prosecutor: Drug Trafficking Conviction Appeal

Roslan Bin Abdul Rani appealed to the High Court of Singapore against his conviction and sentence for drug trafficking. The subordinate courts had found him guilty of selling diamorphine to Razali Bin Yusoff. Yong Pung How CJ dismissed the appeals, upholding the trial judge's assessment of witness credibility and finding no reason to interfere with the sentence of six years’ imprisonment and six strokes of the cane.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeals against conviction and sentence dismissed.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Roslan Bin Abdul Rani appeals his drug trafficking conviction. The High Court upholds the conviction, finding the trial judge's assessment of witness credibility sound.

1.7 Decision Date

14 June 2004

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Respondent	Government Agency	Appeal Dismissed	Won	Glenn Seah Kim Ming of Deputy Public Prosecutor
Roslan Bin Abdul Rani	Appellant	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost	B Ganesh of Ganesha and Partners

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Yong Pung How	Chief Justice	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Glenn Seah Kim Ming	Deputy Public Prosecutor
B Ganesh	Ganesha and Partners

4. Facts

Appellant was charged with drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
Appellant allegedly sold 0.29g of diamorphine to Razali for $600.
Razali was arrested after selling the drugs to undercover CNB officers.
Appellant and Razali met at Petir LRT station before the transaction.
There were 13 telephone calls between the appellant and Razali on the day of the arrest.
Appellant ran from CNB officers but was apprehended after a chase.
Razali's evidence formed the backbone of the Prosecution's case.

5. Formal Citations

Roslan Bin Abdul Rani v Public Prosecutor, MA 188/2003, [2004] SGHC 121

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2003-02-27	Drug transaction occurred at Petir LRT station
2003-02-27	Roslan Bin Abdul Rani and Razali Bin Yusoff arrested
2004-06-15	High Court dismissed the appeals against conviction and sentence

7. Legal Issues

Assessment of Witnesses' Credibility
- Outcome: The court upheld the trial judge's assessment of the witnesses' credibility, finding no reason to overturn the conviction.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
  - Conflicting evidence
  - Inconsistencies in testimony
- Related Cases:
  - [1998] 3 SLR 656
  - [1997] 1 SLR 113
  - [2001] 3 SLR 94
  - [1995] 3 SLR 701
  - [1998] 3 SLR 788
  - [1995] 3 SLR 417
  - [1999] 1 SLR 25
  - [1961] 1 MLJ 105
  - [1992] 1 SLR 340
  - [1995] 3 SLR 564
  - [1997] 3 SLR 464
  - [2004] SGHC 72
  - [2001] 2 SLR 474
  - [2000] 1 SLR 205
Drug Trafficking
- Outcome: The court upheld the conviction for drug trafficking, finding that the appellant had sold diamorphine to Razali.
- Category: Substantive
Appellate Review of Factual Findings
- Outcome: The court reiterated the principle that an appellate court is reluctant to overturn a trial judge's findings of fact unless plainly wrong.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [1998] 3 SLR 656
  - [1997] 1 SLR 113
  - [2001] 3 SLR 94
  - [1995] 3 SLR 701
  - [1998] 3 SLR 788
  - [1995] 3 SLR 417
Accomplice Evidence
- Outcome: The court found Razali to be a credible witness whose evidence could be relied on.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [1999] 1 SLR 25
Appellate Review of Sentence
- Outcome: The court found no reason to interfere with the district judge’s sentencing decision.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [2004] 1 SLR 587
  - [1986] SLR 126
  - [2001] 1 SLR 674

8. Remedies Sought

Appeal against conviction
Appeal against sentence

9. Cause of Actions

Drug Trafficking

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Litigation

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Yap Giau Beng Terence v PP	High Court	Yes	[1998] 3 SLR 656	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court is reluctant to overturn a trial judge’s finding of fact, especially where it hinges upon an assessment of the credibility and veracity of the witnesses.
Ameer Akbar v Abdul Hamid	High Court	Yes	[1997] 1 SLR 113	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court is reluctant to overturn a trial judge’s finding of fact, especially where it hinges upon an assessment of the credibility and veracity of the witnesses.
Kong See Chew v PP	High Court	Yes	[2001] 3 SLR 94	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court is reluctant to overturn a trial judge’s finding of fact, especially where it hinges upon an assessment of the credibility and veracity of the witnesses.
Garmaz s/o Pakhar v PP	High Court	Yes	[1995] 3 SLR 701	Singapore	Cited for the principle that interference would be warranted only if the district judge was plainly wrong in her assessment of the witnesses, thus rendering the verdict against the weight of the evidence.
Syed Jafaralsadeg bin Abdul Kadir v PP	High Court	Yes	[1998] 3 SLR 788	Singapore	Cited for the principle that interference would be warranted only if the district judge was plainly wrong in her assessment of the witnesses, thus rendering the verdict against the weight of the evidence.
PP v Victor Rajoo	High Court	Yes	[1995] 3 SLR 417	Singapore	Cited for the principle that interference would be warranted only if the district judge was plainly wrong in her assessment of the witnesses, thus rendering the verdict against the weight of the evidence.
Chai Chien Wei Kelvin v PP	High Court	Yes	[1999] 1 SLR 25	Singapore	Cited for the principle that whether or not the court should believe the evidence of the accomplice depended on all the circumstances of the case.
Khoon Chye Hin v PP	High Court	Yes	[1961] 1 MLJ 105	Singapore	Cited for the traditionally broad approach of our courts in assessing a witness’s credibility
Samad bin Kamis v PP	High Court	Yes	[1992] 1 SLR 340	Singapore	Cited for the traditionally broad approach of our courts in assessing a witness’s credibility
PP v Kalpanath Singh	High Court	Yes	[1995] 3 SLR 564	Singapore	Cited for the traditionally broad approach of our courts in assessing a witness’s credibility
Sundara Moorthy Lankatharan v PP	High Court	Yes	[1997] 3 SLR 464	Singapore	Cited for the traditionally broad approach of our courts in assessing a witness’s credibility
Lim Teck Chye v PP	High Court	Yes	[2004] SGHC 72	Singapore	Cited for the traditionally broad approach of our courts in assessing a witness’s credibility
Ang Jwee Herng v PP	High Court	Yes	[2001] 2 SLR 474	Singapore	Cited for recognizing and accepting that human fallibility in observation, retention and recollection was oftentimes inevitable in the evidence of a witness.
Jimina Jacee d/o C D Athananasius v PP	High Court	Yes	[2000] 1 SLR 205	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the district judge was therefore entitled to determine that Razali’s testimony was credible despite the discrepancies
Chua Yong Khiang Melvin v PP	High Court	Yes	[1999] 4 SLR 87	Singapore	Cited for the principle that the appellant failed to show that the district judge’s findings of fact were against the weight of the evidence such that the verdict was unsafe and appellate intervention was warranted
Ong Ah Tiong v PP	High Court	Yes	[2004] 1 SLR 587	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court may only interfere with sentence if it is satisfied that (a) the sentencing judge made the wrong decision as to the proper factual basis for the sentence; (b) there was an error on the part of the trial judge in appreciating the material placed before him; (c) the sentence was wrong in principle; or (d) the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or inadequate
Tan Koon Swan v PP	High Court	Yes	[1986] SLR 126	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court may only interfere with sentence if it is satisfied that (a) the sentencing judge made the wrong decision as to the proper factual basis for the sentence; (b) there was an error on the part of the trial judge in appreciating the material placed before him; (c) the sentence was wrong in principle; or (d) the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or inadequate
Lim Poh Tee v PP	High Court	Yes	[2001] 1 SLR 674	Singapore	Cited for the principle that an appellate court may only interfere with sentence if it is satisfied that (a) the sentencing judge made the wrong decision as to the proper factual basis for the sentence; (b) there was an error on the part of the trial judge in appreciating the material placed before him; (c) the sentence was wrong in principle; or (d) the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive or inadequate

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute Name	Jurisdiction
s 5(1)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2001 Rev Ed)	Singapore
s 33 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2001 Rev Ed)	Singapore
s 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 116 of the Evidence Act (Cap 97, 1997 Rev Ed)	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Diamorphine
Drug trafficking
Undercover sting operation
Accomplice
Credibility of witnesses
Petir LRT station
CNB
Long statement

15.2 Keywords

Drug trafficking
Diamorphine
Singapore
Criminal law
Evidence
Appeal
Conviction
Sentence

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Misuse of Drugs Act	95
Criminal Law	60
Evidence Law	50
Criminal Revision	40

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Drug Trafficking
Evidence