A-GC appeals Yusoff Rawther's acquittal in drugs and firearms case
In a statement, the A-GC said the High Court's June 12 decision saw Yusoff being freed without being called to enter his defence at the end of the prosecution's case.
Yusoff was charged under Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 and Section 36(1) of the Arms Act 1960.
"After reviewing and considering the court's decision, the A-GC filed the notice of appeal today to challenge the acquittal and discharge," it said.
High Court judge Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin freed Yusoff from drug trafficking and possession of imitation firearms charges after ruling that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case.
Jamil, in his ruling, said the evidence produced in court failed to support a reasonable conclusion that the accused had exclusive control over the vehicle or custody and control over the pistols and drugs.
He said the evidence only raised suspicion and was insufficient to prove the accused's possession or control of the items.
Yusoff had been accused of trafficking 305g of cannabis in a vehicle parked in front of a surau at the Kuala Lumpur police contingent headquarters at 10.15am on Sept 6 last year.
He also faced a separate charge of possessing two imitation pistols by the roadside near a condominium on Jalan Bukit Kiara at 9.25am on the same day.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Barnama
8 hours ago
- Barnama
Police Officer Murder Trial: Defence To File New Submission Under Section 300(d)
IPOH, July 16 (Bernama) -- The defence in the trial of DSP Mohd Nazri Abdul Razak, who is accused of killing 17-year-old Muhammad Zaharif Affendi Muhd Zamrie two years ago, will be filing a new written submission related to Section 300(d) of the Penal Code. Defence counsel M. Athimulan told the High Court here today that they needed to review their previous submissions. "Our submissions comprised both Section 300(c) and (d) of the Penal Code, but were more concentrated on Section 300(c). However, the prosecution's stand now is that they are relying on Section 300(d). "This creates a need to revise our entire submissions. In view of that, we are seeking an adjournment to file this new submission, with the court's indulgence, in about six weeks," he said. The court allowed the adjournment, giving the defence six weeks to file the new written submission, while the prosecution was given four weeks thereafter to respond. Judge Datuk Bhupindar Singh Gucharan Singh Preet fixed Oct 1 and 2 for the full hearing of submissions from both parties. Deputy Public Prosecutor Afzainizam Abdul Aziz said Section 300(d) was mentioned during the prosecution's opening statement on Nov 5 last year, but the defence's submissions had not focused on that section. "In our opening statement, we stated that we would be relying on Sections 300(c) and 300(d) of the Penal Code. However, the submissions we received from the defence mainly focused on Section 300(c). "Therefore, the defence now needs to submit arguments on Section 300(d) as well, to ensure there are no issues if the case proceeds to the appeal stage," he said when met at the court today.
New Straits Times
13 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Melaka couple on drugs arrested after 13km high-speed chase
MELAKA: A couple, believed to be under the influence of drugs, made a desperate attempt to escape the police by speeding 13km from Tengkera, even ramming into a Motorcycle Patrol Unit (URB) officer before being apprehended in Taman Bukit Rambai yesterday evening. The incident, which occurred around 6pm, began when the suspects who were in a car, refused to stop when approached by URB officers from the Tengkera police station at Pangsapuri Taman Anika. Melaka Tengah district police chief Assistant Commissioner Christopher Patit said the officers gave chase as the car sped along Jalan Tun Tuah, continued to Jalan Tun Perak, and eventually entered Lebuh AMJ. The URB team then requested backup from a Mobile Patrol Vehicle (MPV) unit to help intercept the fleeing vehicle, which continued at high speed until Jalan Teruna 1, Taman Bukit Rambai. Along the way, it also rammed into a civilian vehicle in Tengkera. The suspect was driving recklessly, including crashing into a civilian vehicle near Rumah Awam Datin Fatimah in Tengkera, running red lights, and endangering other road users, he said. Upon reaching Jalan Teruna 1, Bukit Rambai, the suspect reversed the car and rammed into a URB officers motorcycle, causing minor injuries. Both suspects were eventually caught with assistance from the MPV team and the Tengkera Task Force. Upon inspection, officers found a bag containing two transparent packets of a substance believed to be heroin, weighing a total of 15.06g, believed to be for personal use. Christopher added that the suspects, aged 26 and 28, were taken to the Tengkera police station for further action. A urine test showed both tested positive for methamphetamine. Police also seized a weighing scale, a set of keys, and the car. The case is being investigated under Sections 186 and 332 of the Penal Code, as well as Sections 39B and 15(1)(a) of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. Meanwhile, a 1-minute 15-second video of the MPV chase involving the suspects car has gone viral on social media, drawing various reactions from netizens.
New Straits Times
14 hours ago
- New Straits Times
Najib's bankruptcy case adjourned to Sept 8 over disorganised submissions
KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Najib Razak's bid to stay bankruptcy proceedings was postponed after the High Court raised concerns over disorganised and incomplete submissions by his legal team. Judicial commissioner Suhendran Sockanathan @ Saheran Abdullah also instructed Najib's lawyer Muhammad Farhan Shafee to refile a consolidated set of submissions after finding that key issues were either missing or scattered across documents. Farhan had earlier argued that the Inland Revenue Board's (IRB) RM1.69 billion tax claim against Najib was tied to funds allegedly received from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), which were still the subject of ongoing criminal and civil proceedings. He submitted that there were unresolved legal issues surrounding whether the alleged proceeds of criminal activity could be taxed under Section 4 of the Income Tax Act 1967. "The IRB has treated the sums received through the appellant's personal accounts, alleged to have originated from 1MDB, as income. "These amounts do not fall within the scope of Section 4 of the Income Tax Act. Furthermore, provisions under the Anti-Money Laundering Act are also involved," he said during the proceeding today. Farhan also told the court that these matters were pending before the Special Commissioners of Income Tax, and a final ruling had yet to be made. He also raised the issue of potential double recovery by the government, saying there were attempts to penalise his client under both criminal and tax laws using the same facts. However, the court pressed Farhan repeatedly for clarity, pointing out that these central arguments were either not included in the written submissions or only briefly referenced in affidavits. "None of this is (arguments) in your submissions, you know? "At the moment, you are all over the place. "I do not want to have bits here and bits there... it is too cumbersome," Saheran said. Farhan then suggested that the court grant a short date to allow his team to update and streamline their submissions. He acknowledged that their arguments had not been presented in a structured manner and expressed his willingness to return to court with a more comprehensive and organised set of submissions. Saheran: I think yes... Farhan, I think you need to focus a bit more. Farhan: Sure. Saheran: Update the submissions and get it to us... I do not want this to be sitting on my docket. For a long period of time. How long will it take? Farhan: We can file it within the week. Saheran: Take two weeks... but do it properly. Senior federal counsel Norhisham Ahmad, who appeared for IRB, also supported the call for clearer submissions, adding that many of the appellant's arguments had not been raised in their original filings. The court then fixed Sept 8 to hear the case. Najib is appealing against two bankruptcy notices stemming from additional tax assessments amounting to RM1.46 billion, which have now ballooned with penalties and interest to RM1.69 billion. The former prime minister maintains that the tax assessments are flawed and should not proceed while related matters are being litigated in other courts. On June 25, 2019, the government, through IRB, filed the suit against Najib asking him to settle the unpaid tax with interest at five per cent, a year from the date of judgment, as well as costs and other relief deemed fit by the court. The government claimed that Najib had failed to pay his income tax from 2011 to 2017 within the stipulated 30-day period after assessment notices were issued by the IRB.
