Public Prosecutor v Ravivarma Govindan: Drug Importation & Misuse of Drugs Act
In [2024] SGHC 99, the High Court of Singapore convicted Ravivarma Govindan of two charges of importing Class A controlled drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The Public Prosecutor brought charges against Govindan for importing cannabis and methamphetamine. Justice Aedit Abdullah convicted Govindan and, considering his limited role as a courier and the Prosecution's certificate of substantive assistance, sentenced him to life imprisonment and 20 strokes of the cane. Govindan has appealed the decision.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
General Division of the High Court1.2 Outcome
Accused convicted on both charges; sentenced to life imprisonment and 20 strokes of the cane.
1.3 Case Type
Criminal
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Ravivarma Govindan was convicted of importing cannabis and methamphetamine into Singapore, violating the Misuse of Drugs Act. He received life imprisonment and caning.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Public Prosecutor | Prosecution | Government Agency | Judgment for Prosecution | Won | Sunil Nair of Attorney-General’s Chambers Tung Shou Pin of Attorney-General’s Chambers Jotham Tay Zi Xun of Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Ravivarma Govindan | Defendant | Individual | Convicted | Lost |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Aedit Abdullah | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Sunil Nair | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Tung Shou Pin | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Jotham Tay Zi Xun | Attorney-General’s Chambers |
| Cheong Jun Ming Mervyn | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Lim Yi Zheng | Advocatus Law LLP |
| Skandarajah s/o Selvarajah | M/s S Skandarajah & Co |
4. Facts
- The Accused was charged with importing cannabis and methamphetamine into Singapore.
- The drugs were found in a car driven by the Accused at Tuas Checkpoint.
- The Accused claimed he did not know the drugs were in the car, believing they were cigarettes.
- The Prosecution relied on statutory presumptions of possession and knowledge.
- The Accused had a prior incident where he was allegedly tricked into carrying contraband.
- Follow-up calls and text messages suggested the Accused knew about the drugs.
- The Accused was found to be inconsistent in his statements and testimony.
5. Formal Citations
- Public Prosecutor v Ravivarma Govindan, Criminal Case No 23 of 2023, [2024] SGHC 99
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Accused drove from Johor Bahru to Tuas Checkpoint. | |
| Accused was stopped by an ICA officer. | |
| Accused was arrested. | |
| CNB officers arrived at A1 White House. | |
| First Cautioned Statement recorded. | |
| First Long Statement recorded. | |
| Second Long Statement recorded. | |
| Third Long Statement recorded. | |
| Fourth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Fifth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Sixth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Seventh Long Statement recorded. | |
| Eighth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Ninth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Tenth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Eleventh Long Statement recorded. | |
| Twelfth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Thirteenth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Fourteenth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Fifteenth Long Statement recorded. | |
| Second Cautioned Statement recorded. | |
| Trial began. | |
| Trial concluded. | |
| Arguments heard. | |
| Sentencing stage. | |
| Judgment issued. |
7. Legal Issues
- Importation of Controlled Drugs
- Outcome: The court found the accused guilty of importing controlled drugs.
- Category: Substantive
- Related Cases:
- [2019] 2 SLR 254
- [2013] 3 SLR 1052
- [2019] 1 SLR 1003
- Presumption of Possession
- Outcome: The court found that the accused failed to rebut the presumption of possession.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2018] 1 SLR 499
- [2020] 2 SLR 1375
- Presumption of Knowledge
- Outcome: The court found that the accused failed to rebut the presumption of knowledge.
- Category: Procedural
- Related Cases:
- [2011] 4 SLR 1156
- [2017] 1 SLR 633
8. Remedies Sought
- Conviction
- Sentencing under the Misuse of Drugs Act
9. Cause of Actions
- Importation of a Class A controlled drug under s 7 of the Misuse of Drugs Act
10. Practice Areas
- Criminal Litigation
- Drug Offences
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adili Chibuike Ejike v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 2 SLR 254 | Singapore | Cited for the elements of the offence of importation under s 7 of the MDA. |
| Public Prosecutor v Adnan bin Kadir | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2013] 3 SLR 1052 | Singapore | Cited for the element of importation. |
| Ramesh a/l Perumal v Public Prosecutor and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2019] 1 SLR 1003 | Singapore | Cited for the element of knowledge required to prove the offence. |
| Gopu Jaya Raman v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 1 SLR 499 | Singapore | Cited for the burden of proof on the accused to establish that he did not know that the drugs were in the car. |
| Beh Chew Boo v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 2 SLR 1375 | Singapore | Cited for the burden of proof on the accused to establish that he did not know that the drugs were in the car. |
| Nagaenthran a/l K Dharmalingam v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 4 SLR 1156 | Singapore | Cited for the burden of proof on the accused to prove that he did not know the nature of the controlled drug. |
| Obeng Comfort v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2017] 1 SLR 633 | Singapore | Cited for the burden of proof on the accused to prove that he did not know the nature of the controlled drug. |
| Muhammad bin Kadar and another v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2011] 3 SLR 1205 | Singapore | Cited for the court’s common law exclusionary discretion. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chia Kee Chen and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2018] 2 SLR 249 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that no weight ought to be accorded to the statements given by a witness if the accused did not have the opportunity to test the veracity of the statements. |
| Public Prosecutor v Ilechukwu Uchechukwu Chukwudi | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2015] SGCA 33 | Singapore | Cited for the law that allows an accused person to run alternative cases, even if they may be inconsistent. |
| Public Prosecutor v Mas Swan bin Adnan and another appeal | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2012] 3 SLR 527 | Singapore | Cited for the law that allows an accused person to run alternative cases, even if they may be inconsistent. |
| Mohammad Azli bin Mohammad Salleh v Public Prosecutor and another appeal and other matters | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2020] 1 SLR 1374 | Singapore | Cited for the need to qualify the seeming breadth of the holding in Mas Swan. |
| Gobi a/l Avedian v Public Prosecutor | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2021] 1 SLR 180 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that indifference on the part of the accused person would not suffice to rebut 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 for the principle that it would rarely, if ever, be sufficient for an accused person to rebut the s 18(2) presumption by stating simply that he believed whatever he was told in relation to what was in his possession. |
| Public Prosecutor v Gunalan Goval | High Court | Yes | [2022] SGHC 62 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that it would rarely, if ever, be sufficient for an accused person to rebut the s 18(2) presumption by stating simply that he believed whatever he was told in relation to what was in his possession. |
| Public Prosecutor v Chan Chuan and another | Court of Appeal | Yes | [1991] 1 SLR(R) 14 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that sentences of caning cannot run concurrently. |
| Public Prosecutor v Azlin bte Arujunah and other appeals | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2022] 2 SLR 825 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that sentences of caning cannot run concurrently. |
| Vasentha d/o Joseph v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 122 | Singapore | Cited for sentencing considerations. |
| Loo Pei Xiang Alan v Public Prosecutor | High Court | Yes | [2015] 5 SLR 500 | Singapore | Cited for sentencing considerations. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 7 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33B(1) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) s 33B(2)(a) | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 21 | Singapore |
| Misuse of Drugs Act s 18(2) | Singapore |
| Interpretation Act 1965 (2020 Rev Ed) s 2(1) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (2020 Rev Ed) s 267(1) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 23 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 22 | Singapore |
| Evidence Act 1893 (2020 Rev Ed) ss 105 | Singapore |
| Evidence Act 1893 (2020 Rev Ed) ss 108 | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 307(2) | Singapore |
| Criminal Procedure Code s 318(3) | Singapore |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Importation
- Controlled drug
- Presumption of possession
- Presumption of knowledge
- Courier
- Certificate of substantive assistance
- Cannabis
- Methamphetamine
15.2 Keywords
- Drug Importation
- Misuse of Drugs Act
- Singapore
- Criminal Law
- Cannabis
- Methamphetamine
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Misuse of Drugs Act | 95 |
| Sentencing | 70 |
| Criminal Law | 60 |
| Criminal Procedure | 40 |
| Admissibility of evidence | 30 |
16. Subjects
- Criminal Law
- Drug Importation
- Statutory Interpretation