[Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] MOHD SUHAIZAL BIN MAT SULAIMAN

[Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] MOHD SUHAIZAL BIN MAT SULAIMAN

Cumulative oral testimony (PW3, PW2, PW5, PW4, PW1) and documentary bank records established deception (fake offer letters and representations), dishonest and fraudulent inducement, and delivery/transfer of monies to the accused; accomplice testimony was admissible and credible in light of MACC Act; elements of cheating under s.415 and s.420 proven beyond reasonable doubt, justifying conviction and sentence.

Citation
BH-82-4-08/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Accused: Mohd Suhaizal bin Mat Sulaiman
Court
Magistrates' Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
28 February 2023
Case Number
BH-82-4-08/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Cheating (section 420 Penal Code) / Judgment and Sentencing (magistrate Court)
Outcome
Accused convicted on both counts of cheating under s.420 Penal Code.
Legal Topics
Cheating (s.420 Penal Code), Dishonesty and Fraud, Accomplice Evidence and Corroboration, Defective Charges/time Particulars, Money Tracing and Bank Evidence, Sentencing and Stay Pending Appeal
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑corruption Law Evidence Law Procedural Law Cheating (s.420 Penal Code) Dishonesty and Fraud Accomplice Evidence and Corroboration Defective Charges/time Particulars +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 23 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Mohd Suhaizal bin Mat Sulaiman

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Cheating (section 420 Penal Code) / Judgment and Sentencing (magistrate Court)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether charges were defective for omission of timing particulars
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved elements of cheating under s.415 and s.420 Penal Code (deception, dishonest/ fraudulent inducement, delivery of property)
  3. 3 Reliability and need for corroboration of accomplice evidence (PW4, PW5) given MACC Act provisions

Ratio Decidendi

Cumulative oral testimony (PW3, PW2, PW5, PW4, PW1) and documentary bank records established deception (fake offer letters and representations), dishonest and fraudulent inducement, and delivery/transfer of monies to the accused; accomplice testimony was admissible and credible in light of MACC Act; elements of cheating under s.415 and s.420 proven beyond reasonable doubt, justifying conviction and sentence.

Court Disposition

Accused convicted on both counts of cheating under s.420 Penal Code.

Orders

  • Accused sentenced to 5 years imprisonment and RM10,000 fine for each count
  • Imprisonment terms to run concurrently from date of conviction