High Court throws out man’s claim of potential mix-up of drug exhibits at CNB photo-taking session

SINGAPORE - A 29-year-old man charged with heroin trafficking, who raised the possibility of a mix-up of the drug exhibits during a photo-taking session at the Central Narcotics Bureau (CNB), had his claims thrown out by the High Court.

Malaysian citizen Yogesswaran C. Manogaran had argued through his lawyers from Kalidass Law Corporation during his trial that there was a risk of a break in the chain of custody of the drugs seized by CNB officers.

He also highlighted a discrepancy in the weight of the bundles recorded by CNB, and what was later measured by the Health Sciences Authority (HSA), and said he and co-accused Teo Yiu Kin Tee, 75, were not allowed to be present during the photo-taking session.

The two men were arrested on Jan 14, 2020, in the Geylang Bahru area.

Teo was carrying a blue plastic bag with two bundles inside, which contained 837g of powdery substance. Analysis by the HSA later showed the substance contained 24.81g of heroin. A person found trafficking more than 15g of heroin faces either life imprisonment or the death penalty.

Yogesswaran’s wife Hema Mogan, who was sitting on a bench in front of Block 57 Geylang Bahru, was also arrested. Her age was not stated.

After their arrest, CNB officers including Assistant Superintendent (ASP) Yang Rongluan recorded their statements.

In claiming a break in the chain of custody of the drugs, Yogesswaran said that during the press release photo-taking, the bundles were not placed in tamper-proof bags and did not bear any labelling or markings.

He also said there was a procedural lapse in the handling of the drugs, as the bundles were not sealed in the presence of the two men after the media photo-taking process.

In a judgment published on June 19, Justice Philip Jeyaretnam noted that the three accused persons were present in the exhibit management room (EMR) at the CNB headquarters in New Bridge Road for the processing of the exhibits.

They observed the process, which included officers cutting open the exhibits and taking swabs, through a glass panel. The exhibits were also weighed in the presence of Teo, Yogesswaran and Hema.

The High Court judge said it was defensible for CNB to have a policy of not having the accused persons present during the subsequent press release photo-taking.

But he added that the authorities must take appropriate measures both to ensure the chain of custody is not broken and to facilitate proof of the unbroken chain of custody.

Justice Jeyaretnam said that even if an accused person does not observe the sealing of a drug exhibit, it does not mean that the chain of custody is automatically broken.

He noted that the drug exhibits were placed on the table in the EMR under the observation and control of ASP Yang. After the photo-taking session, they were sealed in their respective tamper-proof bags.

While the judge accepted the evidence of CNB officers that there was no break in the chain of custody, he said the photo-taking process should have been recorded in the investigation diary and mentioned in the statements, and not “left to be uncovered by defence detective work”.

As for the difference in the weight of the drugs recorded by ASP Yang and HSA’s Dr Ong Mei Ching, the judge said he accepted Dr Ong’s evidence that the recorded weight of a drug exhibit may differ depending on the placement of the exhibit on the weighing scale.

This is because the drugs were in the form of granular blocks or clumps. Furthermore, the percentage differences in weight were small, added the judge.

“Those differences could not give rise to any doubt at all concerning whether the exhibits Dr Ong weighed were the same exhibits that had been weighed in the EMR,” said Justice Jeyaretnam.

Yogesswaran also claimed that he thought the bundles contained duty unpaid cigarettes, or drugs that would carry a lighter sentence, but the judge rejected this defence.

Teo, through his lawyers from Gabriel Law Corporation and Fleet Street Law, said the drugs were for his own consumption.

Justice Jeyaretnam said this was not backed up by evidence, and pointed out that Teo had previously confessed he sold drugs to support his family.

He convicted both Teo, an unemployed stateless citizen, and Yogesswaran on drug trafficking charges. It was not stated if Hema is facing charges.

Yogesswaran was sentenced to life imprisonment and 15 strokes of the cane. Teo was sentenced to the mandatory death penalty.

Correction note: An earlier version of the story stated that the two men would be sentenced at a later date. This is incorrect. We are sorry for the error.