PATHMARAJAH A/L MYLVAGANAM

PATHMARAJAH A/L MYLVAGANAM

Court discharged and released accused at close of prosecution because prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case: key witness SP21 was materially inconsistent and uncorroborated, material witnesses were not called, prosecution failed to prove requisite cognitive knowledge that documents were forged or that accused participated in a conspiracy, and predicate offences were not proven such that AMLA charges also fell.

Citation
WA-62K-116-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution (predicate): Pendakwa Raya (Predikat) - Puan Rullizah Binti Haji Abdul Majid; Puan Norjamilah Shuhadah Binti Tahet; Prosecution (amla): Pendakwa Raya (AMLA) - Puan Norazihah Binti Asmuni; Accused: Pathmarajah a/l Mylvaganam; Defence Counsel: T/N Vignesh Kumar & Associate (Defence Firm)
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
8 May 2023
Case Number
WA-62K-116-04/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (predicate Offences Under Penal Code and Amla) / Decision on Prima Facie at Close of Prosecution (s180 Criminal Procedure Code)
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Forgery, Use of Forged Documents, Money Laundering, Prima Facie Test, Credibility and Corroboration of Interested Witnesses, Adverse Inference (s114(g) Evidence Act)
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑money Laundering Evidence Law Property/conveyancing Law Conspiracy Forgery Use of Forged Documents Money Laundering +3 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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya (Predikat) - Puan Rullizah Binti Haji Abdul Majid; Puan Norjamilah Shuhadah Binti Tahet

Prosecution (predicate)

Pendakwa Raya (AMLA) - Puan Norazihah Binti Asmuni

Prosecution (amla)

Pathmarajah a/l Mylvaganam

Accused

T/N Vignesh Kumar & Associate (Defence Firm)

Defence Counsel

Procedural Posture

Criminal (predicate Offences Under Penal Code and Amla) / Decision on Prima Facie at Close of Prosecution (s180 Criminal Procedure Code)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case at the close of its case under s180 Criminal Procedure Code
  2. 2 Whether accused abetted a conspiracy to forge documents under s109 read with s468 Penal Code
  3. 3 Whether accused dishonestly used forged documents under s471 read with s465 Penal Code and had requisite knowledge

Ratio Decidendi

Court discharged and released accused at close of prosecution because prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case: key witness SP21 was materially inconsistent and uncorroborated, material witnesses were not called, prosecution failed to prove requisite cognitive knowledge that documents were forged or that accused participated in a conspiracy, and predicate offences were not proven such that AMLA charges also fell.