WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

Prosecution failed to establish essential elements across all charges: for s.409 the prosecution could not prove dishonest appropriation (element of fraud); for s.468 the handwriting expert's evidence was internally inconsistent and there was no proof accused forged the signatures or that the cheques were issued to defraud; for s.4(1)(b) AMLA the predicate offences were not established and the accused lacked the requisite knowledge or reasonable suspicion. Consequently no prima facie case existed and accused was discharged without being called to enter defence.

Citation
NA-62K-113-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecutor: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-113-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Close of Prosecution (no Prima Facie Case; Accused Discharged)
Outcome
Accused discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution for all charges (no prima facie case); bail returned to surety
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409 Penal Code), Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468 Penal Code), Money Laundering (s.4(1)(b) AMLA Act 613), Prima Facie Test at Close of Prosecution, Expert Handwriting Evidence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Money Laundering (amla) Commercial/banking Law Forensic Document Examination Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409 Penal Code) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468 Penal Code) Money Laundering (s.4(1)(b) AMLA Act 613) Prima Facie Test at Close of Prosecution +1 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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecutor

Wong Tze Wei

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Close of Prosecution (no Prima Facie Case; Accused Discharged)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved elements of s.409 Criminal breach of trust
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved s.468 forgery (73 cheques) and that accused forged signatures
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved s.4(1)(b) AMLA (money laundering) including predicate offence and mens rea

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to establish essential elements across all charges: for s.409 the prosecution could not prove dishonest appropriation (element of fraud); for s.468 the handwriting expert's evidence was internally inconsistent and there was no proof accused forged the signatures or that the cheques were issued to defraud; for s.4(1)(b) AMLA the predicate offences were not established and the accused lacked the requisite knowledge or reasonable suspicion. Consequently no prima facie case existed and accused was discharged without being called to enter defence.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution for all charges (no prima facie case); bail returned to surety

Orders

  • Accused released and discharged without being called to enter defence for all charges under s.409, s.468 and s.4(1)(b) AMLA
  • Bail amount returned to surety