Public Prosecutor v Mohamed Shalleh: Trafficking of Diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act
In Public Prosecutor v Mohamed Shalleh bin Abdul Latiff, the High Court of Singapore convicted Mohamed Shalleh of possession of not less than 54.04g of diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking, an offence under s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court found that the prosecution proved the charge beyond a reasonable doubt and that the accused failed to rebut the presumption that he knew the drugs were diamorphine. The mandatory sentence of death was passed on the accused.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Accused convicted; mandatory sentence of death passed.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Mohamed Shalleh was convicted of possessing diamorphine for trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court found he failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge.
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 | Wong Woon Kwong of Attorney-General’s Chambers Anandan Bala of Attorney-General’s Chambers Theong Li Han of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Mohamed Shalleh Bin Abdul Latiff | Defendant | Individual | Convicted | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Hoo Sheau Peng | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Wong Woon Kwong | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Anandan Bala | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Theong Li Han | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ram Goswami | Ram Goswami |
| Dhanaraj James Selvaraj | James Selvaraj LLC |
4. Facts
- Accused was arrested on 11 August 2016 after collecting a package from a Malaysian man.
- The package contained not less than 54.04g of diamorphine.
- Accused claimed he believed the package contained contraband cigarettes.
- Accused was to deliver the package to a third party at Mei Ling Street.
- Accused owed money to a man named Bai, who arranged the delivery.
- Accused received $7,000 in an envelope prior to the delivery.
- Accused had previously assisted Bai in delivering what he believed were contraband cigarettes.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Mohamed Shalleh bin Abdul Latiff, Criminal Case No 74 of 2018, [2019] SGHC 93
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Accused arrested; drugs seized. | |
| Trial began | |
| Trial continues | |
| Trial continues | |
| Trial continues | |
| Trial continues | |
| Trial continues | |
| Judgment issued |
7. Legal Issues
- Possession of Controlled Drug
- Outcome: The court found that the accused was in possession of a controlled drug.
- Category: Substantive
- Knowledge of the Nature of the Drug
- Outcome: The court found that the accused failed to rebut the presumption that he knew the drugs were diamorphine.
- Category: Substantive
- Purpose of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court found that the accused possessed the drug for the purpose of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Mandatory Death Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Trafficking in a Controlled Drug
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
- Drug Trafficking
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muhammad Ridzuan bin Md Ali v Public Prosecutor and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2014] 3 SLR 721 | Singapore | Cited for the elements of a charge of trafficking under s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) of the MDA. |
| Obeng Comfort v Public Prosecutor | Unknown | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 633 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that the accused must prove, on a balance of probabilities, that he did not have knowledge of the nature of the drug. |
| Public Prosecutor v Gobi a/l Avedian | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 113 | Singapore | Cited for guidance on the situation where the accused relies on his belief in information given by the drugs supplier in an attempt to rebut the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Trafficking
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Contraband Cigarettes
- Courier
15.2 Keywords
- drug trafficking
- diamorphine
- singapore
- criminal law
- misuse of drugs act
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 75 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
| Sentencing | 50 |
| Evidence | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking