Muhammad Ramzaan v Public Prosecutor: Drug & Traffic Offenses - Sentencing Appeal

Muhammad Ramzaan s/o Akhbar appealed against the sentence imposed by the District Judge for 14 charges related to drug and traffic offenses. The High Court, presided over by Justice Vincent Hoong, dismissed the appeal, upholding the original sentence of 5 years and 27 days' imprisonment, 3 strokes of the cane, and a 20-month disqualification order from holding or obtaining all classes of driving licenses. The court ordered the imprisonment term to commence from the expiry of his sentence for a prior conviction, and the disqualification order to commence from the appellant’s release from prison.

1. Case Overview

1.1 Court

General Division of the High Court

1.2 Outcome

Appeal Dismissed

1.3 Case Type

Criminal

1.4 Judgment Type

Ex Tempore Judgment

1.5 Jurisdiction

Singapore

1.6 Description

Appeal against sentence for drug and traffic offenses. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the original sentence and disqualification order.

1.7 Decision Date

11 January 2023

2. Parties and Outcomes

Party Name	Role	Type	Outcome	Outcome Type	Counsels
Muhammad Ramzaan s/o Akhbar	Appellant	Individual	Appeal Dismissed	Lost
Public Prosecutor	Respondent	Government Agency	Appeal Dismissed	Won	Wuan Kin Lek Nicholas, Quek Lu Yi

3. Judges

Judge Name	Title	Delivered Judgment
Vincent Hoong	Judge of the High Court	Yes

4. Counsels

Counsel Name	Organization
Wuan Kin Lek Nicholas	Attorney-General’s Chambers
Quek Lu Yi	Attorney-General’s Chambers

4. Facts

Appellant was convicted and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment for drug charges on 6 January 2020.
Appellant failed to surrender on 31 January 2020 and absconded from bail.
From January 2020 to January 2021, the appellant committed a series of drug and traffic offences.
Appellant was arrested on 26 January 2021 and commenced serving his sentence for the first conviction.
On 25 July 2022, the appellant pleaded guilty to 14 charges.
The District Judge sentenced the appellant to 5 years and 27 days’ imprisonment and 3 strokes of the cane.
The District Judge ordered the imprisonment term to commence from the expiry of his sentence for the first conviction.

5. Formal Citations

Muhammad Ramzaan s/o Akhbar v Public Prosecutor, Magistrate’s Appeal 9144 of 2022, [2023] SGHC 9
Public Prosecutor v Muhammad Ramzaan s/o Akhbar, , [2022] SGDC 213

6. Timeline

Date	Event
2020-01-06	Appellant convicted and sentenced for charges under the Misuse of Drugs Act
2020-01-31	Appellant ordered to surrender to begin serving his sentence but failed to do so
2020-01-01	Appellant committed a series of drug and traffic offences
2021-01-26	Appellant arrested and commenced serving his sentence for the first conviction
2022-07-25	Appellant pleaded guilty to 14 charges

7. Legal Issues

Date of Commencement of Imprisonment Term
- Outcome: The court held that the imprisonment term should commence at the end of the appellant’s sentence for his first conviction.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2019] SGDC 264
  - [2016] SGHC 20
Date of Commencement of Disqualification Order
- Outcome: The court held that the disqualification order should commence from the date of the appellant’s release from prison.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
  - [2014] 2 SLR 1028

8. Remedies Sought

Appeal against Sentence
Reduction of Imprisonment Term
Reduction of Disqualification Period

9. Cause of Actions

Drug Offences
Traffic Offences

10. Practice Areas

Criminal Law
Appeals

11. Industries

No industries specified

12. Cited Cases

Case Name	Court	Affirmed	Citation	Jurisdiction	Significance
Low Meng Chay v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[1993] 1 SLR(R) 46	Singapore	Cited regarding the justification for custodial sentences for traffic charges given previous convictions and inability to pay fines.
Public Prosecutor v Mohamad Sultan bin Abdul Rahmin	District Court	Yes	[2019] SGDC 264	Singapore	Cited by the appellant to argue that his imprisonment term should commence on the date of his conviction, but the court gave little weight to this case due to the lack of written grounds of decision.
Janardana Jayasankarr v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2016] 4 SLR 1288	Singapore	Cited for the principle that little weight can be placed on a precedent without a reported judgment explaining the reasons for the decision.
Public Prosecutor v Hang Tuah bin Jumaat	High Court	Yes	[2016] SGHC 20	Singapore	Cited regarding the consideration of whether the present set of offences arose in a different transaction from earlier offences when determining the commencement date of the imprisonment term.
Muhammad Saiful bin Ismail v Public Prosecutor	High Court	Yes	[2014] 2 SLR 1028	Singapore	Cited for the general rule that a disqualification order should commence from the time the offender is released after serving the term of imprisonment, but distinguished in the present case.

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 8(b)(ii) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 33A(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 8(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
s 33(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act	Singapore
Road Traffic Act (Cap 276, 2004 Rev Ed)	Singapore
s 63(4) of the Road Traffic Act	Singapore
s 65(1)(b) of the Road Traffic Act	Singapore
s 65(5)(b) of the Road Traffic Act	Singapore
s 307(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010	Singapore

15. Key Terms and Keywords

15.1 Key Terms

Misuse of Drugs Act
Road Traffic Act
Disqualification Order
Commencement of Sentence
Absconding from Bail
Specific Deterrence

15.2 Keywords

drug offences
traffic offences
sentencing
criminal law
appeal
disqualification order

16. Subjects

Criminal Law
Sentencing
Drug Offences
Traffic Offences

17. Areas of Law

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing
Sentencing
Drug Offences
Traffic Offences