Apex court acquits duo, including man on death row, of drug trafficking

Two men who were initially convicted of drug trafficking - one of whom was sentenced to the death penalty - were acquitted by the Court of Appeal yesterday.

A three-judge court, led by Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, allowed the appeal of Raj Kumar Aiyachami, 40, against his conviction and mandatory death sentence.

The court also allowed the appeal of Ramadass Punnusamy, 41, against his conviction and sentence of life imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane.

The appeals of both men turned solely on whether each of them knew the nature of the drugs.

The pair had been charged over a bag of drugs containing not less than 1.875kg of cannabis.

On Sept 21, 2015, Ramadass, a Malaysian, drove a lorry into Singapore. Central Narcotics Bureau officers then observed Ramadass delivering the bag to Raj, a Singaporean, in Senoko.

Raj, who was represented by Mr Ramesh Tiwary, did not dispute that the drugs were in his possession, but contended that there had been a mistaken delivery.

He said he had ordered toba-cco laced with a synthetic che-mical that mimicked the nar-cotic effects of cannabis, known as Butterfly, and had gone to pick it up, but received a bag of cannabis instead.

Ramadass, who was represented by Mr Eugene Thuraisingam, did not dispute he had delivered the bag to Raj, but contended that he did not know the nature of the drugs.

He said he had been told by someone called Muruga that four bags of chemically sprayed tobacco had been placed in the lorry.

He added that he had delivered three bags to others before making the delivery to Raj.

Ramadass contested three statements he had given that appeared to suggest he had knowledge of the nature of the drugs.

The pair were convicted by the High Court in June 2020.

The trial judge, Justice Chua Lee Ming, rejected the evidence of two inmates Raj had called to testify on his behalf.

One inmate, Mark Kalaivanan Tamilarasan, said he had gone to Senoko that same day to pick up cannabis and chewable tobacco, but had instead received Butterfly.

Mark said he was sure of the date, which he had tattooed on his finger as his pet hamster had died that day.

The other inmate said he used to buy Butterfly from Raj.

Justice Chua also rejected Ramadass' evidence, and said he had ample opportunity to tailor his evidence to fit Raj's defence.

The judge did not believe Ramadass would have accepted what Muruga had told him.

Raj was given the mandatory death sentence.

Ramadass was sentenced to a life term and the mandatory minimum of 15 strokes of the cane as he was found to be a courier, and was issued a certificate of substantive assistance by the prosecution.

Yesterday, the Court of Appeal overturned their convictions.

The apex court said Raj had succeeded in establishing his defence of mistaken delivery, which was supported by the evidence of other witnesses.

"In our judgment, the fact that Mark had effectively confessed to having at least attempted to commit a serious offence is a weighty factor in evaluating his evidence," said the court.

The apex court added that the trial judge erred in rejecting Mark's evidence on the basis that he and Raj "had more than ample opportunity to collude and manufacture the story".

The court also concluded that the contested statements could not be relied upon to show that Ramadass had actual knowledge that he was delivering cannabis. Among other things, there were doubts as to the actual words that Ramadass had used to describe the drugs.

The appeals of both men turned solely on whether each of them knew the nature of the drugs. The pair had been charged over a bag of drugs containing not less than 1.875kg of cannabis.