PP v Zainudin & Shanti: Drug Trafficking under Misuse of Drugs Act (MDA)
In Public Prosecutor v Zainudin bin Mohamed and Shanti Krishnan, the High Court of Singapore convicted Zainudin and Shanti of drug trafficking offenses under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Zainudin was found guilty of possessing diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking, while Shanti was found guilty of drug trafficking by delivering diamorphine to Zainudin. The court sentenced Zainudin to the mandatory death penalty, while Shanti received life imprisonment after the Public Prosecutor certified that she had provided substantive assistance to the Central Narcotics Bureau. The case involved the arrest of both individuals following a CNB surveillance operation where Shanti delivered a bundle of drugs to Zainudin's residence.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Guilty verdict for both accused. Zainudin sentenced to death; Shanti sentenced to life imprisonment.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Zainudin and Shanti were convicted of drug trafficking under the MDA. Zainudin received the death penalty, while Shanti received life imprisonment after providing substantive assistance.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Judgment for Prosecution | Won | Ong Luan Tze of Attorney-General’s Chambers Carene Poh Kai Lin of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Zainudin bin Mohamed | Defendant | Individual | Guilty | Lost | Suang Wijaya of Independent Practitioner Eugene Singarajah Thuraisingam of Independent Practitioner Jason Peter Dendroff of Independent Practitioner |
| Shanti Krishnan | Defendant | Individual | Guilty | Partial | A Revi Shanker s/o K Annamalai of Independent Practitioner James Dhanaraj Selvaraj of Independent Practitioner |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| See Kee Oon | Judicial Commissioner | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Ong Luan Tze | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Carene Poh Kai Lin | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Suang Wijaya | Independent Practitioner |
| Eugene Singarajah Thuraisingam | Independent Practitioner |
| Jason Peter Dendroff | Independent Practitioner |
| A Revi Shanker s/o K Annamalai | Independent Practitioner |
| James Dhanaraj Selvaraj | Independent Practitioner |
4. Facts
- CNB officers arrested Zainudin and Shanti on 16 May 2014.
- Shanti delivered a bundle to Zainudin at Block 631 Ang Mo Kio Avenue 4.
- The bundle contained not less than 22.73g of diamorphine.
- Zainudin admitted that the substance in the bin was heroin and belonged to him.
- Zainudin admitted he intended to distribute the heroin to clients.
- Shanti claimed she did not know the bundle contained heroin, thinking it was Malay herbs.
- Shanti admitted to delivering the bundle to Zainudin in exchange for money.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Zainudin bin Mohamed and another, Criminal Case No 37 of 2016, [2016] SGHC 245
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Zainudin and Shanti arrested by CNB officers. | |
| Shanti delivered a bundle to Zainudin at Block 631. | |
| Shanti's cautioned statement was recorded. | |
| Seized drug exhibits were photographed and weighed. | |
| Exhibits sent to HSA for analysis. | |
| Zainudin's first long statement recorded. | |
| Zainudin's second long statement recorded. | |
| Zainudin's third long statement recorded. | |
| Zainudin's fourth long statement recorded. | |
| Shanti's eighth long statement recorded. | |
| Shanti's ninth statement recorded. | |
| Shanti's tenth statement recorded. | |
| Trial began. | |
| Zainudin and Shanti were convicted and sentenced. | |
| Grounds of decision issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Drug Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found both accused guilty of drug trafficking. Zainudin was found to have possessed the drugs for the purpose of trafficking, and Shanti was found to have delivered the drugs.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Possession of controlled drugs
- Intention to traffic
- Knowledge of the nature of the drug
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Outcome: The court found that Zainudin had actual knowledge of the drugs. Shanti failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Rebutting the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA
- Wilful blindness
- Sentencing
- Outcome: Zainudin was sentenced to the mandatory death penalty. Shanti was sentenced to life imprisonment after the Public Prosecutor issued a certificate of substantive assistance.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Mandatory death penalty
- Discretion not to impose death penalty under s 33B of the MDA
- Definition of 'courier'
- Certificate of substantive assistance
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Sentencing according to the Misuse of Drugs Act
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
- Possession of Controlled Drugs for the Purpose of Trafficking
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Chum Tat Suan and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] 1 SLR 834 | Singapore | Endorsed the narrow meaning of 'courier' in s 33B(2)(a) of the MDA, stating that packing is not an act contemplated within the meaning of transporting, sending or delivering. |
| Public Prosecutor v Abdul Haleem bin Abdul Karim and another | High Court | Yes | [2013] 3 SLR 734 | Singapore | Defined a courier's involvement as limited to delivering or conveying drugs from point A to point B. |
| Poon Soh Har and another v Public Prosecutor | N/A | Yes | [1977-1978] SLR(R) 97 | Singapore | Distinguished on its facts; the Prosecution's case against Shanti did not depend solely on similar fact evidence to establish guilt. |
| Dinesh Pillai a/l K Raja Retnam v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 2 SLR 903 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that under s 18(2) of the MDA, the accused must prove on a balance of probabilities that they did not know or could not reasonably be expected to have known that the bundle contained controlled drugs. |
| Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 4 SLR 1156 | Singapore | Expounded the approach that proving wilful blindness beyond a reasonable doubt is one way to prove actual knowledge, and the Prosecution need not rely on the presumption in s 18(2) of the MDA. |
| Public Prosecutor v Khartik Jasudass and another | High Court | Yes | [2015] SGHC 199 | Singapore | Reiterated the principle in Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam v Public Prosecutor [2011] 4 SLR 1156 that proving wilful blindness beyond a reasonable doubt is one way to prove actual knowledge. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohsen bin Na’im | High Court | Yes | [2016] SGHC 150 | Singapore | Reiterated the principle in Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam v Public Prosecutor [2011] 4 SLR 1156 that proving wilful blindness beyond a reasonable doubt is one way to prove actual knowledge. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 5(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 5(2) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 2 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 18(2) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33B | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33B(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33B(2) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 22 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 23 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 147 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 325(1)(a) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug trafficking
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Courier
- Substantive assistance
- Presumption of knowledge
- Wilful blindness
- Batu
- Jamah
15.2 Keywords
- Drug trafficking
- Diamorphine
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Drug Trafficking | 98 |
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 70 |
| Sentencing | 60 |
| Evidence Law | 60 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 50 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Statutory Interpretation