PP v Sritharan K Raja Rajan: Misuse of Drugs Act - Importation of Diamorphine

In Public Prosecutor v Sritharan K Raja Rajan, the High Court of Singapore convicted Sritharan K Raja Rajan of importing not less than 21.16g of diamorphine into Singapore under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The Prosecution relied on statutory presumptions of possession and knowledge. The sole issue was whether the accused knew the nature and quantity of the drugs. The court found that the accused failed to rebut the applicable presumptions and sentenced him to life imprisonment and caning of 15 strokes.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

High Court

1.2 Outcome

Convicted of the charge under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Grounds of Decision

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Sritharan K Raja Rajan was convicted of importing diamorphine into Singapore 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 NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorProsecutionGovernment AgencyJudgment for ProsecutionWonClaire Poh, Anandan s/o Bala, Jotham Tay
Sritharan K Raja RajanDefendantIndividualConvictedLostA.P.M Ferlin Jayatissa, Lum Guo Rong, Prasad s/o Karunakarn

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Kannan RameshJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Claire PohAttorney-General’s Chambers
Anandan s/o BalaAttorney-General’s Chambers
Jotham TayAttorney-General’s Chambers
A.P.M Ferlin JayatissaLexcompass LLC
Lum Guo RongLexcompass LLC
Prasad s/o KarunakarnK Prasad & Co

4. Facts

  1. Accused was stopped at Woodlands Checkpoint while riding a motorcycle.
  2. Drugs were found in a red plastic bag in the motorcycle compartment.
  3. The drugs were analyzed and found to contain not less than 21.16g of diamorphine.
  4. The accused claimed he thought he was transporting 25g of methamphetamine for Fei Poh.
  5. The accused had transported a drug consignment on 9 October 2017.
  6. The Public Prosecutor issued a certificate of substantive assistance under s 33B(2)(b) of the MDA.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Sritharan K Raja Rajan, Criminal Case No 1 of 2020, [2020] SGHC 121

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Accused transported alleged 25g of methamphetamine into Singapore.
Accused arrested at Woodlands Checkpoint.
Contemporaneous statement recorded from the accused.
Cautioned statement recorded from the accused.
Seized drug exhibits submitted to the Health Sciences Authority for analysis.
Statement recorded from the accused.
Statement recorded from the accused.
Statement recorded from the accused.
Statement recorded from the accused.
Trial began.
Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Importation of Controlled Drugs
    • Outcome: The court found that the accused failed to rebut the presumption that he knew the nature and quantity of the drugs.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Knowledge of the nature of drugs
      • Rebuttal of statutory presumptions
    • Related Cases:
      • [2019] 2 SLR 254
  2. Rebuttal of Statutory Presumptions
    • Outcome: The court held that the accused failed to rebut the statutory presumption under s 18(2) of the MDA.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Sub-Issues:
      • Burden of proof
      • Credibility of witness testimony
    • Related Cases:
      • [2018] 1 SLR 499

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act
  2. Death penalty

9. Cause of Actions

  • Importation of controlled drugs

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Litigation
  • Drug Offences

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Adili Chibuike Ejike v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2019] 2 SLR 254SingaporeCited for the elements of the offence of importation of a controlled drug under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act.
Ng Beng Siang and others v Public ProsecutorSingapore Court of AppealYes[2003] SGCA 17SingaporeCited for the principle of balancing probative value and prejudicial effect in evaluating the admissibility of similar fact evidence.
Public Prosecutor v Ranjit Singh Gill Menjeet Singh and anotherUnknownYes[2017] 3 SLR 66SingaporeCited for the principle of balancing probative value and prejudicial effect in evaluating the admissibility of similar fact evidence.
Gopu Jaya Raman v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2018] 1 SLR 499SingaporeCited for the principle that evidence must be evaluated neutrally in determining whether the relevant statutory presumption has been rebutted.
Thong Sing Hock v Public ProsecutorUnknownYes[2009] 3 SLR(R) 47SingaporeCited concerning the evidence of public servants such as investigation officers.
Chan Lie Sian v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2019] 2 SLR 439SingaporeCited for the principle that the failure of a cross-examining party to challenge a witness’s testimony may commonly be taken to be acceptance of it.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 7Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) ss 33(1)Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) ss 33BSingapore
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) ss 18(1)Singapore
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) ss 18(2)Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 23Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) s 22Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Diamorphine
  • Methamphetamine
  • Courier
  • Statutory presumption
  • Woodlands Checkpoint
  • Misuse of Drugs Act
  • Substantive assistance

15.2 Keywords

  • Drugs
  • Importation
  • Diamorphine
  • Singapore
  • Misuse of Drugs Act
  • Criminal Law

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Trafficking
  • Statutory Interpretation

17. Areas of Law

  • Criminal Law
  • Statutory Offences
  • Misuse of Drugs Act