Indian-origin man in Singapore acquitted after receiving death penalty via Zoom

• Image Credit: Internet

• Oct 31, 2022 | Kabir Chakraborty

In May 2020, Genasan was sentenced to death, becoming Singapore's first capital punishment recipient during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Digital Desk: A 39-year-old Indian-origin Malaysian who was sentenced to death via Zoom for drug trafficking in May 2020 was acquitted on Monday by Singapore's Court of Appeal, which said the prosecution failed to prove its case.

According to local media reports, Singapore's highest court of appeals acquitted Punithan Genasan of one count of drug trafficking after introducing two drug couriers to each other in a car park here in October 2011.

In May 2020, Genasan was sentenced to death, becoming Singapore's first capital punishment recipient during the Covid-19 pandemic.

When one of the drug couriers claimed that Genasan was the mastermind behind a drug transaction for which the drug couriers were arrested by Central Narcotics Bureau officers on October 28, 2011, he was implicated in the case.

Both had granular substances containing at least 28.5g of diamorphine or pure heroin. According to the Central Narcotics Bureau website, illegal trafficking, import, or export of diamorphine above 15 grams is punishable by death under Singapore's Misuse of Drugs Act.

The prosecution failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a meeting between Genasan and the two drug couriers occurred before the actual drug transaction in the trial for which the verdict was released on Monday.

Chief Justice Sundaresh Menon, along with Justices Andrew Phang and Tay Yong Kwang, stated at the trial that there were discrepancies in the evidence regarding the date and time of the alleged meeting.

The meeting was a "pivotal element" in the charge against Genasan, according to Justice Tay, who delivered the verdict on behalf of the three-judge panel.

Citing the "unusual circumstances of this case," he stated that the charge had not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt because the meeting had not occurred.

 Justice Tay stressed that decision in this appeal was focused on the meeting and had no effect whatsoever on the conviction and appeals of the couriers, who were found to own the drugs and in the process of distributing them.