Public Prosecutor v Sinniah a/l Sundram Pillai

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Hoo Sheau Peng J
• Judgment Date: 20 March 2019
• Neutral Citation: [2019] SGHC 79
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Docket Number: Criminal Case No 35 of 2018
• Year: 2019
• Published date: 09 April 2020
• Hearing Date: 29 January 2019,04 January 2019,29 August 2018,28 August 2018
• Plaintiff Counsel: April Phang, Sia Jiazheng and Desmond Chong (Attorney-General's Chambers)
• Defendant Counsel: Mahadevan Lukshumayeh (Lukshumayeh Law Corporation) and Zaminder Singh Gill (Hilborne Law LLC)
• Subject Matter: Criminal Law,Statutory offences,Misuse of Drugs Act
• Citation: [2019] SGHC 79

Hoo Sheau Peng J: Introduction

The accused, Sinniah a/l Sundram Pillai, claimed trial to a charge of importing into Singapore not less than 18.85g of diamorphine (the “charge”), an offence under s 7 and punishable under s 33(1) of the Misuse of Drugs Act (Cap 185, 2008 Rev Ed) (the “MDA”).

At the conclusion of the trial, I found that the charge against the accused had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and convicted him accordingly. The accused’s role was limited to the transportation of the drugs and a certificate of substantive assistance was granted. As such, I exercised my discretion under s 33B of the MDA to impose the alternative sentence of life imprisonment and the mandatory minimum of 15 strokes of the cane on the accused.

The accused has now filed an appeal against sentence. For the sake of completeness, I now provide the full reasons for my decision regarding both his conviction and sentence.

The Prosecution’s case

The material facts were largely uncontested. They are contained in an Agreed Statement of Facts, furnished by the Prosecution pursuant to s 267(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cap 68, 2012 Rev Ed) (the “CPC”) and admitted into evidence.

The undisputed facts The accused’s arrest and seizure of the drugs

The accused is a 47-year-old Malaysian national. At the material time, he was a driver of an unladen trailer bearing registration number JLR 5059 (the “Trailer”), and his job at Yinson Transport Shd Bhn (“Yinson Transport”) was to transport goods, such as cement and steel pipes, from Malaysia to Singapore.¹

On 25 March 2016, the accused drove the Trailer from Malaysia to Singapore via the Woodlands Checkpoint. At about 4.35pm, Checkpoint Inspector Leong Mun Wai (“CI Leong”) and Sergeant Noor Helmi Bin Ali (“Sgt Helmi”) directed the Trailer to a Cargo Clearance Centre checking bay for a routine check. The accused’s belongings were checked in his presence at a table next to the checking bay. During the checks, Sgt Helmi found a screwdriver (the “screwdriver”) and a red pencil case containing one syringe needle and one empty straw in the accused’s bag. When questioned by Sgt Helmi about the items, the accused stated that he did not know what they were for. An ion swab that was conducted on the accused’s hands, wallet and pencil case showed positive results for methamphetamine.²

CI Leong and Sgt Helmi then proceeded to check the cabin of the Trailer. CI Leong noticed something inside the dashboard compartment (the “dashboard compartment”) through the air conditioning vents. Upon unfastening the dashboard panel near the steering wheel (the “dashboard panel”) by unscrewing two screws using the screwdriver, the dashboard compartment within was revealed. CI Leong found a red plastic bag and a potato chip container inside the dashboard compartment.³

The red plastic bag was found to contain a bundle wrapped with black tape (later marked as A1A) (the “bundle of drugs”). The items found were seized. When opened, the bundle of drugs was found to contain a brownish substance. This formed the subject matter of the charge.⁴

Within the potato chip container, three packets of crystalline substance (the “three packets”) were found, along with other drug paraphernalia. The accused was placed under arrest.⁵

Upon questioning by Staff Sergeant Muhammad Saifuddin Rowther Bin Mohidin Pitchai, the accused admitted to ownership and knowledge of the drug exhibits seized. He stated that the black bundle was meant to be delivered to one “Abang” at Tuas, while the contents of the potato chip container were for the purposes of his own consumption of diamorphine and methamphetamine.⁶

There was no dispute as to the integrity and proper custody of all the exhibits at the material times, and I shall not go into the details here.

Drug analysis

The seized exhibits were sent to the Health Sciences Authority for analysis. The bundle of drugs was found to be one packet containing not less than 455.0g of granular/powdery substance which was analysed and found to contain not less than 18.85g of diamorphine.⁷

The three packets were found to contain not less than 0.89g of crystalline substance which was analysed and found to contain not less than 0.59g of methamphetamine. Some of the drug paraphernalia were also found to be stained with methamphetamine and/or diamorphine.⁸

The agreement with Mogan and modus operandi

Sometime in January 2016, the accused had entered into an agreement with one “Mogan” to deliver marunthu, which was the street name for diamorphine, from Malaysia to Singapore. The accused was aware that the packets of marunthu contained diamorphine as he himself was a consumer of marunthu.⁹

Pursuant to this agreement, the accused would inform an unknown Chinese man (the “Chinese man”) when his company assigned him a job which involved him driving the Trailer into Singapore. Thereafter, arrangements would be made for the accused to collect a bundle of marunthu from the Chinese man. The accused would bring the bundle of marunthu into Singapore concealed inside the dashboard compartment on the advice of Mogan. On top of his legitimate job, the accused would deliver the bundle of marunthu to one “Abang”, a Malay man in Singapore, and in turn collect a fee of $3,400 from Abang. Thereafter, the accused would return to Malaysia and pass the money collected from Abang to the Chinese man, who would give him RM500 as remuneration for the delivery.¹⁰

This was the modus operandi for the deliveries, including three occasions where the accused delivered marunthu into Singapore prior to 25 March 2016.¹¹

The events on 25 March 2016

On 25 March 2016, the accused had a job to collect items from a company in Tuas. The accused notified the Chinese man, and pursuant to the agreement that the accused had with Mogan, he collected the red plastic bag containing the bundle of drugs from the Chinese man at about 3.40pm outside his company’s office. After this, the accused used the screwdriver to remove the dashboard panel. He placed the red plastic bag, containing the bundle of drugs, and the potato chip container, containing his drug paraphernalia and his methamphetamine, into the dashboard compartment to conceal them. He then drove into Singapore both to perform his company-assigned job of collecting items from Tuas and to deliver the packet of marunthu to Abang in Singapore. As per the previous deliveries, the accused was to collect a sum of $3,400 from Abang and thereafter pass the sum to the Chinese man, after which the accused would receive his remuneration of RM500.¹²

After entering the Causeway at about 4.00pm, the accused gave a call to Abang and arranged to meet him at 30 Tuas Avenue South 8 at about 5.00pm to pass him the bundle of marunthu. The accused then proceeded to enter Woodlands Checkpoint at about 4.35pm, where he was stopped, searched and arrested.¹³

The accused was not authorised under the MDA or the Regulations made thereunder to import diamorphine and methamphetamine into Singapore.¹⁴

The accused’s statements

The Prosecution relied on nine statements provided by the accused, which were admitted without objection from the accused. I now summarise the pertinent points.

The agreement with Mogan was described in further detail in the accused’s statements: The accused knew Mogan as he was the accused’s ex-colleague from Yinson Transport. The accused did not know Mogan’s full name, or if his real name was Mogan. During the time Mogan was employed at Yinson Transport, he and the accused did not have any interaction.¹⁵ Sometime in January 2016, Mogan approached the accused to ask him to bring marunthu into Singapore in exchange for RM500 per bundle of marunthu transported. The accused told Mogan that he was scared that he would get in trouble with the Singapore police should he be caught. Mogan replied that there was nothing to worry about, unless the accused brought in large amounts of marunthu into Singapore. The accused told Mogan that he would “consider his offer”, and asked for Mogan’s phone number. Mogan refused to give the accused his number and asked for the accused’s number instead, which the accused gave.¹⁶ When the accused returned home that day, he thought about Mogan’s offer. The accused was in “deep financial troubles” then, and needed the money for a variety of purposes including the funding of his own consumption of ‘ice’ and marunthu which cost him RM500 per month. The accused “felt that getting the RM500 for [Mogan’s job] would ease [his] financial problems”.¹⁷ The next day, Mogan called the accused and asked about the offer. The accused agreed to Mogan’s offer. At the same time, Mogan informed him that there was a job to deliver marunthu into Singapore the following day.¹⁸

For the three previous occasions between January to March 2016 when the accused brought marunthu into Singapore for Mogan, the accused confirmed that each time, he collected one bundle of marunthu from the Chinese man, delivered the bundle to Abang, collected $3,400 from Abang and was paid RM500 by the Chinese man.¹⁹ On the first occasion, the marunthu which the accused received was in a transparent packet. On the second and third occasions, the marunthu which the accused received was wrapped in black tape, much like the bundle of drugs the accused was found with on 25 March 2016.²⁰

As for the events on 25 March 2016, after the accused received the red plastic bag that contained the bundle of drugs from the Chinese man, he brought it back to the Trailer with him. There, he opened the red plastic bag, and removed the bundle of drugs as he wanted to check it. The accused saw that it was wrapped in black tape. He then placed the bundle of drugs back into the red plastic bag, before later concealing the red plastic bag containing the bundle of drugs inside the dashboard compartment. The accused drove across Woodlands Checkpoint and was...