Imran v PP: Drug Trafficking, Common Intention, Wilful Blindness, Misuse of Drugs Act
Imran Bin Mohd Arip, Pragas Krissamy, and Tamilselvam a/l Yagasvranan appealed against their convictions and sentences for drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The Court of Appeal of Singapore, comprising Sundaresh Menon CJ, Andrew Phang Boon Leong JA, and Steven Chong JA, heard the appeals. Imran was charged with abetment by conspiracy, while Pragas and Tamil were charged with delivering drugs with common intention. The High Court convicted all three, but the Court of Appeal allowed Pragas's appeal, acquitting him. The court invited submissions on amending the charges against Imran and Tamil.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
Court of Appeal of the Republic of Singapore1.2 Outcome
Appeal allowed in part.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Appeals against drug trafficking convictions. Court examines common intention, wilful blindness, and admissibility of statements under the Misuse of Drugs Act.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Respondent | Government Agency | Partial Loss | Partial | Wong Woon Kwong of Attorney-General’s Chambers Chin Jincheng of Attorney-General’s Chambers Shana Poon of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Imran bin Mohd Arip | Appellant | Individual | To be determined | Reserved | |
| Tamilselvam a/l Yagasvranan | Appellant | Individual | To be determined | Reserved | |
| Pragas Krissamy | Appellant | Individual | Appeal Allowed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Sundaresh Menon | Chief Justice | No |
| Andrew Phang Boon Leong | Judge of Appeal | No |
| Steven Chong | Judge of Appeal | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Wong Woon Kwong | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Chin Jincheng | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Shana Poon | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ker Yanguang | Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC |
| Daniel Chia Hsiung Wen | Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC |
| Mohammad Shafiq bin Haja Maideen | Abdul Rahman Law Corporation |
| Dhanaraj James Selvaraj | James Selvaraj LLC |
| Singa Retnam | I.R.B Law LLP |
| Josephine Iezu Costan | David Nayar and Associates |
4. Facts
- Pragas and Tamil passed Imran a white plastic bag containing 19.42g of diamorphine.
- Imran was arrested in his unit, where drugs were found.
- Tamil was found with $6,700 in his possession.
- Imran made six statements to the CNB admitting to ordering two pounds of heroin.
- Pragas and Tamil claimed they delivered contraband cigarettes, not heroin.
- The Marlboro Red cigarettes were destroyed by the Singapore Customs.
5. Formal Citations
- Imran bin Mohd Arip v Public Prosecutor and other appeals, Criminal Appeal Nos 22, 23 and 24 of 2019, [2020] SGCA 120
- Public Prosecutor v Imran bin Mohd Arip and others, , [2019] SGHC 155
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Pragas and Tamil passed Imran a white plastic bag containing drugs. | |
| CNB officers arrested Pragas and Tamil. | |
| CNB officers raided the Unit and arrested Imran. | |
| Criminal Case No 6 of 2019 commenced. | |
| Judgment reserved. | |
| Judgment delivered. |
7. Legal Issues
- Admissibility of Accused's Statements
- Outcome: The court found that the Six Statements were voluntarily made and admitted them.
- Category: Procedural
- Sub-Issues:
- Inducement
- Threat
- Voluntariness
- Common Intention
- Outcome: The court held that the common intention charge against Pragas and Tamil cannot be sustained as it is premised on different mental states.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Differing Mental States
- Mens Rea
- Wilful Blindness
- Outcome: The court found that the Prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Pragas was wilfully blind to the nature of the Drugs.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Suspicion
- Means of Inquiry
- Deliberate Refusal
8. Remedies Sought
- Appeal against Conviction
- Appeal against Sentence
9. Cause of Actions
- Drug Trafficking
- Abetment by Conspiracy
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor v Aishamudin bin Jamaludin | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 2 SLR 769 | Singapore | Cited for the proposition that it may be more desirable to frame charges against secondary offenders based on abetment or joint possession instead of common intention. |
| 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 under section 34 of the Penal Code. |
| Daniel Vijay s/o Katherasan and others v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2010] 4 SLR 1119 | Singapore | Cited for the elements of a charge under section 34 of the Penal Code and the requirement of common intention. |
| Adili Chibuike Ejike v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 254 | Singapore | Cited for the test for wilful blindness in the context of possession. |
| Gobi a/l Avedian v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] SGCA 102 | Singapore | Cited for the essential elements to prove wilful blindness in the context of the knowledge of the specific nature of a drug. |
| Sulaiman bin Jumari v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] SGCA 116 | Singapore | Cited for the principles in relation to admissibility under s 258(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. |
| Lu Lai Heng v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1994] 1 SLR(R) 1037 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that self-perceived inducements are not operative inducements under s 258(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mohamed Ansari bin Mohamed Abdul Aziz and another | High Court | Yes | [2019] SGHC 268 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that self-perceived inducements are not operative inducements under s 258(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ong Seow Ping and another | High Court | Yes | [2018] SGHC 82 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that self-perceived inducements are not operative inducements under s 258(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. |
| Norasharee bin Gous v Public Prosecutor and another appeal and another matter | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 820 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that an accused person may be convicted solely on the basis of a co-accused person’s testimony, but the co-accused person’s confession has to be very compelling. |
| Tan Kiam Peng v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2008] 1 SLR(R) 1 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that wilful blindness is the legal equivalent of actual knowledge. |
| Muhammad Nabill bin Mohd Fuad v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 984 | Singapore | Cited for the rule in Browne v Dunn. |
| Public Trustee and another v By Products Traders Pte Ltd and others | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2005] 3 SLR(R) 449 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of counsel as an officer of the court. |
| Mia Mukles v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2017] SGHC 252 | Singapore | Cited for the duty of counsel as an officer of the court. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Penal Code (Cap 224, 2008 Rev Ed) s 34 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 5(1)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 12 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 18(2) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 18(4) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33B | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 258 | Singapore |
| Customs Act (Cap 70, 2004 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Heroin
- Drug Trafficking
- Common Intention
- Wilful Blindness
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- CNB
- Contraband Cigarettes
- Statements
- Delivery
- Possession
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Common Intention
- Wilful Blindness
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 75 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
| Criminal conspiracy | 40 |
| Statutory Interpretation | 30 |
| Contract Law | 10 |
| Civil Procedure | 5 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Trafficking
- Evidence
- Sentencing