WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

After maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence at close of case, court found prosecution proved agency and signatory control but failed to prove dishonesty/misappropriation (third element) for s.409, failed to prove checks were forged or that accused forged signatures for s.468, and failed to prove predicate offences and accused's knowledge/suspicion required for AMLA s.4(1)(b); accordingly no prima facie case existed and accused was discharged without being called to enter defence.

Citation
NA-62K-109-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-109-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal: Offences Under Penal Code Ss.409 and 468; Anti‑money Laundering Act 2001 (act 613) S.4(1)(b) / Close of Prosecution Case — Judge Found No Prima Facie Case; Accused Discharged and Released Without Being Called to Enter Defence
Outcome
Accused discharged and acquitted on all charges at close of prosecution for lack of prima facie case; released without being called to enter defence.
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409), Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468), Money Laundering (amla S.4(1)(b)), Prima Facie Standard Under S.180 CPC, Handwriting Expert Evidence, Authority and Agency of Company Signatories
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑money Laundering Commercial Crime Evidence Law Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468) Money Laundering (amla S.4(1)(b)) Prima Facie Standard Under S.180 CPC +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor

Wong Tze Wei

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal: Offences Under Penal Code Ss.409 and 468; Anti‑money Laundering Act 2001 (act 613) S.4(1)(b) / Close of Prosecution Case — Judge Found No Prima Facie Case; Accused Discharged and Released Without Being Called to Enter Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved prima facie case for s.409 (criminal breach of trust)
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved checks were forged and accused forged signatures for s.468
  3. 3 Whether proceeds were from predicate offences and accused knew or suspected so for AMLA s.4(1)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

After maximum evaluation of prosecution evidence at close of case, court found prosecution proved agency and signatory control but failed to prove dishonesty/misappropriation (third element) for s.409, failed to prove checks were forged or that accused forged signatures for s.468, and failed to prove predicate offences and accused's knowledge/suspicion required for AMLA s.4(1)(b); accordingly no prima facie case existed and accused was discharged without being called to enter defence.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and acquitted on all charges at close of prosecution for lack of prima facie case; released without being called to enter defence.

Orders

  • Accused discharged and freed without being called to enter defence on all charges
  • Bail money returned to surety