PP v Yogesswaran & Teo: Trafficking of Diamorphine under Misuse of Drugs Act

In Public Prosecutor v Yogesswaran C Manogaran and Teo Yiu Kin Tee, the High Court of Singapore considered charges against Yogesswaran and Teo for trafficking diamorphine under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Yogesswaran was accused of delivering diamorphine to Teo, while Teo was accused of possessing the drug for trafficking purposes. The court convicted both defendants, finding that Yogesswaran failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge and Teo failed to rebut the presumption of trafficking.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court of the Republic of Singapore

1.2 Outcome

Both accused convicted on the charges against them.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Yogesswaran and Teo were charged with trafficking diamorphine. The court convicted both defendants, finding Yogesswaran failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge and Teo failed to rebut the presumption of trafficking.

1.7 Decision Date

18 June 2023

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Public Prosecutor	Prosecution	Government Agency	Conviction	Won	J Jayaletchmi of Attorney-General’s Chambers Nicholas Wuan Kin Lek of Attorney-General’s Chambers Lim Woon Yee of Attorney-General’s Chambers Jaime Pang of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Yogesswaran C Manogaran	Defendant	Individual	Conviction	Lost	Kalidass s/o Murugaiyan of Kalidass Law Corporation Ashvin Hariharan of Kalidass Law Corporation Prakash Otharam of Kalidass Law Corporation
Teo Yiu Kin Tee	Defendant	Individual	Conviction	Lost	Krishna Ramakrishna Sharma of Fleet Street Law LLC Nandwani Manoj Prakash of Gabriel Law Corporation

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Philip Jeyaretnam	Judge of the High Court	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
J Jayaletchmi	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Nicholas Wuan Kin Lek	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Lim Woon Yee	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Jaime Pang	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Kalidass s/o Murugaiyan	Kalidass Law Corporation
Ashvin Hariharan	Kalidass Law Corporation
Prakash Otharam	Kalidass Law Corporation
Krishna Ramakrishna Sharma	Fleet Street Law LLC
Nandwani Manoj Prakash	Gabriel Law Corporation

4. Facts

Yogesswaran, a Malaysian citizen, worked as a warehouse assistant.
Teo, a Stateless citizen, was unemployed at the time of his arrest.
On January 14, 2020, Yogesswaran delivered two packets containing not less than 24.81g of diamorphine to Teo.
Teo was arrested with the two packets of diamorphine in his possession.
Yogesswaran claimed he did not know the packets contained diamorphine, believing they contained drugs that would attract a light sentence or cigarettes.
Teo claimed the diamorphine was for his own consumption.
The Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) officers seized the drugs and other exhibits from Teo and Yogesswaran.

5. Formal Citations

Public Prosecutor v Yogesswaran C Manogaran and another, Criminal Case No 57 of 2022, [2023] SGHC 170

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2020-01-14	Yogesswaran delivered two packets containing not less than 24.81g of diamorphine to Teo.
2020-01-14	Arrests of Teo, Yogesswaran, and Hema Mogan.
2020-01-15	Cautioned statement recorded from Teo.
2020-01-15	ASP Yang handed the tamper-proof bags containing the Three Drug Exhibits to Staff Sergeant Mohammed Rafi s/o Anwar Badcha
2020-01-16	Teo admitted to Complex Medical Centre for drug withdrawal assessment.
2020-01-19	First long statement recorded from Teo.
2020-01-20	Second long statement recorded from Teo.
2020-01-20	Third long statement recorded from Teo.
2020-01-24	Long statement recorded under s 22 of the CPC by Assistant Superintendent Vinod s/o Pannerchilvam (“ASP Vinod”)
2020-09-24	Long statement recorded under s 22 of the CPC by Assistant Superintendent Vinod s/o Pannerchilvam (“ASP Vinod”)
2022-10-04	Trial began.
2022-11-29	Trial concluded.
2023-03-30	Judgment reserved.
2023-06-19	Judgment issued.

7. Legal Issues

Trafficking of Diamorphine
- Outcome: Both accused were convicted.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2014] 3 SLR 721
  - [2019] 1 SLR 440
  - [2021] 2 SLR 847
  - [1995] 1 SLR(R) 32
  - [2021] 1 SLR 180
  - [2022] 2 SLR 79
  - [2019] 1 SLR 1003
  - [2022] 2 SLR 538
  - [1996] 2 SLR(R) 706
  - [2017] 1 SLR 427
  - [2000] 2 SLR(R) 541
Chain of Custody
- Outcome: The court held that the prosecution proved the chain of custody of the relevant drugs beyond a reasonable doubt.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
  - [2019] 1 SLR 440
  - [2021] 2 SLR 847
  - [1995] 1 SLR(R) 32
Presumption of Knowledge
- Outcome: The court held that Yogesswaran failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2021] 1 SLR 180
  - [2022] 2 SLR 79
Presumption of Trafficking
- Outcome: The court held that Teo failed to rebut the presumption of trafficking.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2022] 2 SLR 538
  - [1996] 2 SLR(R) 706
  - [2017] 1 SLR 427

8. Remedies Sought

Conviction
Sentencing

9. Cause of Actions

Trafficking in Diamorphine

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Litigation

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 an offence under s 5(1)(a) of the MDA.
Mohamed Affandi bin Rosli v Public Prosecutor and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2019] 1 SLR 440	Singapore	Cited regarding the importance of ensuring a complete chain of custody of drugs.
Parthiban a/l Kanapathy v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2021] 2 SLR 847	Singapore	Cited regarding speculative arguments about the possibility of contamination being insufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to the identity of exhibits.
Lim Swee Seng v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1995] 1 SLR(R) 32	Singapore	Cited regarding the Prosecution's burden to explain discrepancies in drug weights and when discrepancies may raise reasonable doubt.
Gobi a/l Avedian v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2021] 1 SLR 180	Singapore	Cited for principles on rebutting the presumption of knowledge under s 18(2) of the MDA.
Mohamed Shalleh bin Abdul Latiff v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2022] 2 SLR 79	Singapore	Cited regarding the court's consideration of bare claims of belief in relation to what was in an accused's possession.
Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2019] 1 SLR 1003	Singapore	Cited regarding the accused person's knowledge of the item being delivered based on the amount of money collected.
A Steven s/o Paul Raj v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2022] 2 SLR 538	Singapore	Cited for relevant factors in determining whether an accused has rebutted the presumption in s 17(c) of the MDA.
Jusri bin Mohamed Hussain v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[1996] 2 SLR(R) 706	Singapore	Cited regarding the burden on the accused to prove that the diamorphine in his possession was not for the purpose of trafficking.
Muhammad bin Abdullah v Public Prosecutor and another appeal	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2017] 1 SLR 427	Singapore	Cited regarding the court's consideration of the totality of the circumstances to determine whether the accused has rebutted the presumption in s 17(c) of the MDA.
Sharom bin Ahmad and another v Public Prosecutor	Court of Appeal	Yes	[2000] 2 SLR(R) 541	Singapore	Cited regarding the relevance of drug trafficking paraphernalia as circumstantial evidence of drug trafficking activities.

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) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 33(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 33B of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 17(c) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed)	Singapore
s 22 of the Criminal Procedure Code	Singapore
s 23 of the Criminal Procedure Code	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Diamorphine
Trafficking
Misuse of Drugs Act
Presumption of Knowledge
Presumption of Trafficking
Chain of Custody
Consumption Defence
Knowledge Defence

15.2 Keywords

Diamorphine
Drug Trafficking
Singapore
Criminal Law
Misuse of Drugs Act

17. Areas of Law

Area Name	Relevance Score
Misuse of Drugs Act	95
Criminal Law	60
Criminal Procedure	40
Evidence Law	30

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Drug Trafficking