Mohamed Mubin Bin Abdul Rahman v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
Key facts
| Court | Court of Appeal |
|---|---|
| Decided | |
| Judges | Belinda Ang Saw Ean, Sundaresh Menon, Tay Yong Kwang |
| Charges / claim | Criminal Law |
| Counsel | Attorney-General's Chambers, Eugene Thuraisingam LLP, I.R.B. Law LLP, April Phang, Eugene Singarajah Thuraisingam, Johannes Hadi, Kenny Yang, Mohamed Fazal Bin Abdul Hamid |
Source: [2024] SGCA 13, Court of Appeal, decided — eLitigation. Updated .
Catchwords
Practice Areas
Counsel (8)
Case Significance
Mohamed Mubin bin Abdul Rahman v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGCA 13 was decided by the Court of Appeal on 8 May 2024, following a hearing on 15 November 2023 in Criminal Appeal No 7 of 2020. The coram comprised Sundaresh Menon CJ, Tay Yong Kwang JCA and Belinda Ang Saw Ean JCA, with Sundaresh Menon CJ delivering the judgment of the court. The appellant, Mr Mohamed Mubin bin Abdul Rahman, was convicted of two capital charges under s 5(1)(a) read with ss 5(2) and 12 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) for trafficking in diamorphine and was sentenced to death. The original charge concerned abetting by instigating his brother, Mr Lokman bin Abdul Rahman, to traffic in two bundles of granular substances containing not less than 39.28g of diamorphine, by directing Lokman to pack and deliver the two bundles, one intended for a person named Edy and the other for the appellant. Lokman was charged with possession of the two bundles for the purpose of trafficking; the trial judge found that charge made out only in respect of the bundle intended for Edy.
[2024] SGCA 13 explained
Mohamed Mubin Bin Abdul Rahman v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2024] SGCA 13) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 8 May 2024. It is categorised under Criminal Law. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.
What is [2024] SGCA 13 about?
Mohamed Mubin Bin Abdul Rahman v PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ([2024] SGCA 13) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2024. Its published catchwords are “Criminal Law — Statutory offences — Misuse of Drugs Act”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.
Which legislation does [2024] SGCA 13 consider?
The judgment refers to Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68), Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185), and Penal Code (Cap 224). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.
What was Mohamed Mubin bin Abdul Rahman v Public Prosecutor [2024] SGCA 13 about?
It was an appeal by Mr Mohamed Mubin bin Abdul Rahman, convicted of two capital charges under the Misuse of Drugs Act for trafficking in diamorphine and sentenced to death. The Court of Appeal heard it in Criminal Appeal No 7 of 2020, deciding on 8 May 2024.
How much diamorphine was involved in [2024] SGCA 13?
The original charge concerned two bundles of granular substances containing not less than 39.28g of diamorphine. The appellant was alleged to have abetted his brother, Mr Lokman bin Abdul Rahman, to traffic in the bundles by directing him to pack and deliver them.
Statutes Cited
Cases Cited (12)
Related cases
Other Singapore judgments involving the same parties or counsel.
Referenced in
Statutes interpreted in this judgment
Judgment
Read the full judgment on the official Singapore Courts portal.
Read on eLitigationSource: eLitigation ([2024] SGCA 13)