Public Prosecutor v Munusamy Ramarmurth: Drug Trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act
In Public Prosecutor v Munusamy Ramarmurth, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore convicted Munusamy Ramarmurth of drug trafficking under s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The court found that Munusamy possessed diamorphine for the purpose of trafficking and failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA. As the Prosecution did not issue a certificate of substantive assistance, the court passed the mandatory death sentence on Munusamy.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Mandatory death sentence passed on the accused.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Munusamy Ramarmurth was convicted of drug trafficking under Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act and sentenced to death. 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 | Conviction | Won | Chong Yong of Attorney-General’s Chambers Benedict Chan Wei Qi of Attorney-General’s Chambers Chin Jincheng of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Munusamy Ramarmurth | Defendant | Individual | Mandatory Death Sentence | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Audrey Lim | Judge of the High Court | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Chong Yong | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Benedict Chan Wei Qi | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Chin Jincheng | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Mahadevan Lukshumayeh | Lukshumayeh Law Corporation |
| Josephine Iezu Costan | David Nayar and Associates |
4. Facts
- Munusamy, a 39-year-old Malaysian, was arrested on 26 January 2018.
- He was found to be in possession of 14 packets containing not less than 6,316.1g of granular/powdery substance.
- The substance was found to contain not less than 57.54g of diamorphine.
- The drugs were recovered from the rear box of Munusamy's motorbike.
- Munusamy claimed he thought the bag contained illegal items or stolen goods.
- Munusamy stated that Sara had told him that Sara always instructs his man to bring drugs into Singapore.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Munusamy Ramarmurth, Criminal Case No 29 of 2021, [2021] SGHC 255
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Munusamy arrested at Harbourfront Centre Tower 2. | |
| Drugs seized from motorbike at Keppel Bay Tower carpark. | |
| Cautioned statement recorded from Munusamy. | |
| Investigative statement recorded from Munusamy. | |
| Investigative statement recorded from Munusamy. | |
| Trial began. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Trial continued. | |
| Judgment issued; Munusamy convicted. |
7. Legal Issues
- Possession of Controlled Drug
- Outcome: The court found that the element of possession was made out as Munusamy accepted that he was in possession of the Red Bag which contained the Drugs.
- Category: Substantive
- Knowledge of the Nature of the Drug
- Outcome: The court found that Munusamy had failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 2 SLR 254
- [2020] 2 SLR 1375
- [2021] 1 SLR 180
- Purpose of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court was satisfied that the Prosecution had proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Munusamy was in possession of the Drugs for the purpose of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 1 SLR 1003
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Death Penalty
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adili Chibuike Ejike v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 254 | Singapore | Cited for the elements required to prove knowledge of the nature of the drug. |
| Beh Chew Boo v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2020] 2 SLR 1375 | Singapore | Cited for the elements required to prove knowledge of the nature of the drug. |
| Gobi a/l Avedian v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2021] 1 SLR 180 | Singapore | Cited for the principles on rebutting the presumption under s 18(2) of the MDA. |
| Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 1003 | Singapore | Cited for the definition of 'traffic' under s 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 |
| s 5(1)(a) read with s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 33(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 33B(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 21 of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| s 2 of the Misuse of Drugs Act | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) | Singapore |
| s 23 of the Criminal Procedure Code | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Diamorphine
- Drug Trafficking
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Courier
- Statement of Agreed Facts
- Panas items
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Trafficking
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore Law
- Criminal Case
- Diamorphine
- Possession
- Knowledge
- Trafficking
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Criminal Law | 90 |
| Criminal Procedure | 60 |
| Evidence | 50 |
| Admissibility of evidence | 40 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Offences