PP v Tan Yew Kuan: Trafficking Diamorphine under Misuse of Drugs Act

In [2023] SGHC 235, the General Division of the High Court of Singapore found Tan Yew Kuan and Dineshkumar Sambusivam guilty of drug trafficking under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Tan was charged with possessing diamorphine for trafficking, while Dineshkumar was charged with trafficking the drugs to Tan. The court found that both accused failed to rebut the presumptions of possession and knowledge under the MDA. The judgment was delivered by Justice Hoo Sheau Peng on 25 August 2023.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Guilty verdict for both accused.

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Tan Yew Kuan and Dineshkumar Sambusivam were charged with drug trafficking. The court found both guilty under the Misuse of Drugs Act.

1.7 Decision Date

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party NameRoleTypeOutcomeOutcome TypeCounsels
Public ProsecutorProsecutionGovernment AgencyGuilty verdictWon
Ng Yiwen of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Joelle Loy of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Lim Woon Yee of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Ronnie Ang of Attorney-General’s Chambers
Tan Yew KuanDefendantIndividualGuilty verdictLost
Dineshkumar SambusivamDefendantIndividualGuilty verdictLost

3. Judges

Judge NameTitleDelivered Judgment
Hoo Sheau PengJudgeYes

4. Counsels

Counsel NameOrganization
Ng YiwenAttorney-General’s Chambers
Joelle LoyAttorney-General’s Chambers
Lim Woon YeeAttorney-General’s Chambers
Ronnie AngAttorney-General’s Chambers
Andre Darius JumabhoyAndre Jumabhoy LLC
Sankar s/o Kailasa Thevar SaminathanSterling Law Corporation
Elengovan s/o V KrishnanElengovan Chambers
Mahadevan LukshumayehLukshumayeh Law Corporation

4. Facts

  1. Mr. Tan was arrested shortly after collecting drugs from Mr. Dineshkumar.
  2. The drugs contained not less than 37.95g of diamorphine.
  3. Mr. Tan admitted in statements that he intended to deliver the drugs on instructions.
  4. Mr. Dineshkumar admitted to delivering drugs for Kelvin.
  5. Cash of $11,200 was recovered from Mr. Dineshkumar's car, received from Mr. Tan.

5. Formal Citations

  1. Public Prosecutor v Tan Yew Kuan and another, Criminal Case No 5 of 2023, [2023] SGHC 235

6. Timeline

DateEvent
Mr. Tan and Mr. Dineshkumar arrested; drugs seized.
Trial began.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Trial continued.
Judgment reserved.

7. Legal Issues

  1. Trafficking in Controlled Drugs
    • Outcome: The court found both accused guilty of trafficking in controlled drugs.
    • Category: Substantive
    • Related Cases:
      • [2014] 3 SLR 721
  2. Presumption of Possession
    • Outcome: The court found that Tan Yew Kuan failed to rebut the presumption of possession.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2019] 2 SLR 254
  3. Presumption of Knowledge
    • Outcome: The court found that both accused failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge.
    • Category: Procedural
    • Related Cases:
      • [2021] 1 SLR 180

8. Remedies Sought

  1. Conviction
  2. Sentencing

9. Cause of Actions

  • Drug Trafficking
  • Possession of Drugs for the Purpose of Trafficking

10. Practice Areas

  • Criminal Litigation

11. Industries

  • No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case NameCourtAffirmedCitationJurisdictionSignificance
Muhammad Ridzuan bin Md Ali v Public Prosecutor and other mattersCourt of AppealYes[2014] 3 SLR 721SingaporeCited for the elements to be established for a charge of trafficking under s 5(1) read with s 5(2) of the MDA.
Adili Chibuike Ejike v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2019] 2 SLR 254SingaporeCited for the ways an accused person may rebut the presumption in s 18(1) of the MDA.
Gobi a/l Avedian v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2021] 1 SLR 180SingaporeCited for the ways an accused person may rebut the presumption in s 18(2) of the MDA.
Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor and another appealCourt of AppealYes[2019] 1 SLR 1003SingaporeCited to distinguish the present case from a situation where a person returns drugs to the original depositor, which does not constitute trafficking.
Mohamed Shalleh bin Abdul Latiff v Public ProsecutorCourt of AppealYes[2022] 2 SLR 79SingaporeCited for the principle that it is rarely sufficient for an accused person to rebut the s 18(2) presumption by stating simply that he believed what he was told.
Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Salihin bin IsmailHigh CourtYes[2023] SGHC 155SingaporeCited for the principle that intention is a subjective state of mind to be objectively inferred from the surrounding facts and circumstances.

13. Applicable Rules

Rule Name
No applicable rules

14. Applicable Statutes

Statute NameJurisdiction
Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 5(1)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
s 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
s 18(1) of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
s 18(2) of the Misuse of Drugs ActSingapore
Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed)Singapore
s 258(1) of the Criminal Procedure CodeSingapore
s 22 of the Criminal Procedure CodeSingapore
s 23 of the Criminal Procedure CodeSingapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

  • Diamorphine
  • Trafficking
  • Misuse of Drugs Act
  • Presumption of Possession
  • Presumption of Knowledge

15.2 Keywords

  • Drug Trafficking
  • Diamorphine
  • Singapore
  • Criminal Law
  • MDA
  • Possession
  • Knowledge

17. Areas of Law

Area NameRelevance Score
Misuse of Drugs Act95
Criminal Law90
Criminal Procedure60
Evidence Law50
Evidence40

16. Subjects

  • Criminal Law
  • Drug Offences
  • Statutory Interpretation