Public Prosecutor v Tan Siew Lam and Another

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Amarjeet Singh JC
• Judgment Date: 04 August 2000
• Neutral Citation: [2000] SGHC 161
• Court: High Court (Singapore)
• Year: 2000
• Published date: 13 March 2013
• Plaintiff Counsel: David Khoo assisted by Leon Loh (Attorney-General's Chambers)
• Defendant Counsel: Tan Teow Yeow assisted by Michael S Chia (AC) (Both Assigned),Subhas Anandan (Briefed) assisted by Gloria James and Anand Nalachandran (AC)(Assigned)
• Citation: [2000] SGHC 161

JUDGMENT:

Grounds of Decision

Charge

1. The 1^st Accused Tan Siew Lam aged 37, a Singaporean, and the 2^nd Accused Anand Naidu A/L Raman aged 23 a Malaysian, were tried jointly. There was no objection to their joint trial by their respective Counsel.

2. The 1^st Accused was tried on an Amended 1^st Charge for trafficking 3 packets of morphine with a net weight of 62.76 grams without authorisation being a controlled drug by having the same in his possession for the purpose of trafficking on 1^st February 2000 at about 10.15pm between the carpark of Blk 164 Bishan Street 13 and Lift B at 8^th floor level of Blk 163 Bishan Street 13, Singapore thereby committing an offence under s 5(1) read with s 5(2) punishable under the Misuse of Drugs Act, Cap 185 (MDA).

Other charges against the 1^st Accused were stood down.

3. The 2^nd Accused was similarly charged for trafficking by giving the 3 packets containing 62.76 grams of morphine to the 1^st Accused Tan Siew Lam on 1^st February 2000 at about 10.15pm at the car park of Blk 164 Bishan Street 13, an offence under s 5(1) punishable under the MDA.

Prosecution Case

4. The undisputed facts were that at about 10.10pm on 1^st February 2000, a number of Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB) officers on surveillance to keep a look-out for the 1^st Accused in the vicinity of the flat where he resided i.e. Blk 163 Bishan Street 13 #08-168 saw a Malaysian registered vehicle JEQ 8706 with an Indian driver driving to the carpark of Blk 164 Bishan Street 13 which was lit with street lamps, and parking his vehicle. He was seen alighting from the said vehicle by Senior Staff Sergeant Tan Yian Chye (S/S/Sgt Tan) CNB who sat in a parked car about 30 – 35 meters away. S/S/Sgt Tan identified him as the 2^nd Accused in Court and said the 2^nd Accused was then wearing a dark coloured cap on his head. S/S/Sgt Tan said he then saw the 2^nd Accused walk to the nearby void deck of Blk 164 where there was a telephone and made a phone call. The 2^nd Accused then returned to the said vehicle at 10.15pm. He opened the driver’s side door and stood beside the door. A short while later, the 1^st Accused, Tan Siew Lam, who was empty handed, emerged from the direction of Blk 164. He approached the 2^nd Accused from the other side of the driver’s open door whereupon the 2^nd Accused took an orange coloured plastic bag from the driver's sea’ and handed the same to the 1^st Accused over the top of the said door. Thereafter, the 1^st Accused was seen walking away towards the direction of Blk 163 Bishan Street 13 which is behind Blk 164. At 10.17pm the 2^nd Accused drove off in the vehicle JEQ 8706 and stopped it beside Blk 162 Bishan Street 13. He alighted from the vehicle and walked towards Blk 167 to a public phone. There, at 10.20pm the 2^nd Accused was arrested by a number of CNB officers. His Malaysian Passport and driving licence were seized. Also seized from the driver’s seat was a red packet with $168/- in it. A black and red cap was found on the 2^nd Accused’s person.

Sergeant Eddie Wee Thiam Poh (Sgt Eddie Wee) observing from about 2 or 3 meters from where the 2^nd Accused parked his car, confirmed S/S/Sgt Tan’s account. He additionally stated that when the 2^nd Accused went to the public phone at the void deck of Blk 164, he walked past him and heard the 1^st Accused saying over the phone ‘Come down. I am here’.

Later the 2^nd Accused was interviewed by Staff Sgt Ang Oon Tho (S/S/Sgt Ang) at the carpark of Blk 167 of Bishan Street 13 inside his car and the questions and answers were recorded in the officer’s pocket book and signed by the 2^nd Accused. The 2^nd Accused told S/S/Sgt Ang that he had no drugs in the car, that he was at the scene to take an ‘ang pow’ from a male Chinese whom he did not know who called him through his handphone 92297274 at 9pm and that he had not handed anything over to the said Chinese person.

5. As for the 1^st Accused, before he arrived and was seen to take delivery of the orange coloured plastic bag from the 2^nd Accused, he was spotted at about 10.15pm coming out of his unit #08-168 of Blk 163 Bishan Street 13 by one Cpl Surainy Bin Supahan (Cpl Surainy) of the Intelligence Division of CNB. He was seen talking on the handphone as he walked down from the staircase to the ground floor. He was empty handed. After he reached the ground floor, he walked in the direction of Blk 164. A few minutes later, at about 10.20pm, Cpl Surainy saw him returning from the direction of Blk 164 and walking back towards Blk 163, this time, towards the lift lobby of the said Block.

5.1 Ronnie See Su Khoon, a Station Inspector, (Ronnie See) attached to the Enforcement Division of CNB, who had taken up position on the 8^th floor of Blk 163 Bishan Street 13 with other officers arrested the 1^st Accused as he emerged from inside lift B on the 8^th floor. The 1^st Accused was then holding an orange plastic bag in his left hand, a bunch of keys and a handphone in his right hand. These were seized. Stn Insp Ronnie See ascertained the 1^st Accused’s name to be Tan Siew Lam and he identified him in Court as the person whom he had arrested at the aforesaid place and time. The 1^st Accused was taken to the 21^st floor lift landing and physically searched and asked some questions at about 10.18pm. As a result of the questions by Stn Insp Ronnie See, the 1^st Accused made certain statements which were recorded by the Inspector in his pocket book shortly afterwards in the 1^st Accused’s flat for which they had left. The entry in the pocket book was signed by the 1^st Accused.

5.2 The questions and answers were as follows:

SI Ronnie See :	"Chua Long Lau Bin See Sim Mee" (Pointing at the Orange colour plastic bag)
	(What is inside the plastic bag?) Pointing at the orange colour plastic bag.
Accused :	"Peh Hoon."
	(Heroin)
SI Ronnie See :	"Luah Chuay Peh Hoon?"
	(How much heroin?)
Accused :	"See Pau."
	(Four packets)
SI Ronnie See :	"See Pau Peh Hoon See Siang Eh?"
	(Four packet of heroin belongs to who?)
Accused :	"See Wah Eh"
	(It’s mine)
SI Ronnie See :	"Lee Kiah Toh Chit Keng Chu?"
	(Which house are you staying?)
Accused :	"Puak Lau."
	(8th level)
SI Ronnie See :	"Kwee Ho Mng Pai?"
	(What is the unit number?)
Accused :	"East Luck Puak"
	(168)
SI Ronnie See :	"Chit Kuah Soh See Sim See Kee Puak Lau, East Luck Puak?"
	(Is this bunch of keys to #08-168?)
Accused :	"See"
	(Yes)

6. Inside the flat, amongst other things, Stn Insp Ronnie See and the other officers found and seized:

1) in the wardrobe in the master bedroom:

i) a stack of empty plastic sachets;

ii) a plastic packet containing empty plastic sachets and

iii) a brown bundle containing empty plastic sachets.

iv) a red plastic bag containing white envelopes with digital weighing scale;

v) 4 lighters;

vi) a pair of pincers and scissors;

vii) 3 plastic spoons;

viii) a small red plastic bag;

ix) 2 bundles and some empty plastic sachets and

x) two stacks of red packets – one containing S$1156/- and the other S$1792/-

Altogether, about 2000 empty sachets were found in the wardrobe. Stn Insp Ronnie See stated that these items are used in the trafficking of drugs. The pair of pincers and lighters were used for heat-sealing the sachets containing drugs. The 1^st Accused when asked by Stn Insp Ronnie See if all the exhibits belonged to him had nodded his head. All the exhibits were eventually handed to Insp Tan Choon Hee the Investigating Officer of the case including the orange plastic bag with its contents which had not been opened.

According to the Investigating Officer, the contents of the orange plastic bag revealed 3 newspaper bundles in each of which was a plastic packet of yellowish granular substance. They were labelled as G1a-1, G1b-1 and G1c-1 by the Investigating Officer and photographed.

The Investigating Officer confirmed the recovery of 4 red packets with S$168/- in each packet similar to the one recovered from the 1^st Accused with S$168/- and two other stacks of red packets one of 40 packets containing S$28/- each totalling S$1,120/-, the other 17 packets containing S$68/- each totalling S$1,156/-. He also took possession, amongst other things, 3 mobile phones from the 1^st Accused, the number of one of them was 96714234.

These plastic packets with their granular substance together with the pair of scissors, the pair of pincers and the 3 plastic spoons were handed over by the Investigating Officer to Dr Liu Chi Pang, Scientific Officer of the Department of Scientific Services who analysed all the aforesaid exhibits and issued six certificates under s 16 of the Misuse of Drugs Act certifying the following:

i) Exh. P59

Lab No. N1-2000-00263-009

One plastic bag of 445.5 grams of granular/powdery substance analysed and found to contain not less than 21.76 grams of morphine.

ii) Exh. P60

Lab No. N1-2000-00263-010

One packet containing 440.1 grams of granular/powdery substance analysed and found to contain not less than 20.89 grams of morphine.

iii) Exh. P61

Lab No. N1-2000-00263-011

One packet containing 440.9 grams of granular/powdery substance analysed and found to contain not less than 20.11 grams of morphine.

Dr Liu stated that the purity level of the substance varied from 4.6% to 4.9%. The pair of scissors, 2 pincers and three plastic spoons were also examined by Dr Liu and found to be stained with diamorphine as Exhibits P63, P64 and P65 showed. The 3 spoons were also found to be additionally stained with morphine.

8. Ng Choon Howe, Senior Manager with Singtel Mobil Pte Ltd and in charge of the GSM switch, produced the Call Trace Report for mobile phone no. 96714234. According to the Report there was an incoming call on 1^st February 2000 to mobile phone No. 96714234 at 22.1219 hours (10.1219pm) lasting a duration of 10 seconds. The call was made from a telephone no. 3543208.

9....