PUBLIC PROSECUTOR v Iswan Bin Ali

[2024] SGHC 284 High Court (General Division) 6 November 2024 • HC/CC 4/2024 • 10 min read

5 cases cited

Catchwords

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing — Sentencing

Practice Areas

Criminal Procedure and Sentencing

Judges (1)

Dedar Singh Gill Delivered

Counsel (8)

Attorney-General's Chambers Firm Elengovan Chambers Firm Matthew Chiong Partnership Firm Ariel Tan Hui Ru Counsel Prosecution Elengovan s/o V Krishnan Counsel Accused Hon Yi Counsel Prosecution Wong Hong Weng Stephen Counsel Accused Yeo Zhen Xiong Counsel Prosecution

Parties (2)

Public Prosecutor Prosecution Iswan bin Ali Accused

Case Significance

In Public Prosecutor v Iswan bin Ali [2024] SGHC 284, decided on 6 November 2024, the General Division of the High Court heard Criminal Case No 4 of 2024, with Dedar Singh Gill J delivering the judgment after hearings on 17 September and 1 October 2024. The accused, Iswan bin Ali, had faced one charge of having in his possession for the purpose of trafficking not less than 61.19g of diamorphine under section 5(1)(a) read with section 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed). On 17 September 2024, Dedar Singh Gill J found that 51.41g of diamorphine across Exhibits A1A1A, A1A2A, A1A3A and B1A1 was in the accused's possession for the purpose of trafficking, but because the accused had raised sufficient doubt as to whether Exhibits C1A and C1B were so held, the judge exercised the power under section 128(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code 2010 (2020 Rev Ed) to alter the charge, as set out in Public Prosecutor v Iswan bin Ali [2024] SGHC 239. The altered charge related to events on 9 April 2020 at about 12.45am at an open carpark at Blk 90 Pipit Road, Singapore.

Summary

The accused, Iswan bin Ali, faced a charge of trafficking in diamorphine after the court altered an earlier possession-for-trafficking charge, the altered charge alleging that on 9 April 2020 he had in his possession for the purpose of trafficking four packets containing not less than 51.41g of diamorphine under section 5(1)(a) read with section 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act. He pleaded guilty and the court convicted him, the prescribed punishment for trafficking more than 15g of diamorphine being the mandatory death penalty unless he was found to be a courier under section 33B. The General Division of the High Court, per Dedar Singh Gill J, found that Iswan had some decision-making power over pricing and that his acts went beyond merely transporting, selling or delivering the drugs, held that he was not a courier, and passed the mandatory death sentence.

What happened in Public Prosecutor v Iswan bin Ali [2024] SGHC 284?

Dedar Singh Gill J found that 51.41g of diamorphine was in Iswan bin Ali's possession for the purpose of trafficking, and altered the original charge of not less than 61.19g under the Misuse of Drugs Act using section 128(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code, after doubt arose over certain exhibits.

What was the drug quantity in Public Prosecutor v Iswan bin Ali [2024] SGHC 284?

Iswan bin Ali originally faced a charge involving not less than 61.19g of diamorphine under section 5(1)(a) read with section 5(2) of the Misuse of Drugs Act. Dedar Singh Gill J found 51.41g across four exhibits was held for trafficking and altered the charge accordingly.