Pathmarajah A/L Mylvaganam

Pathmarajah A/L Mylvaganam

Failure to specify the mode of participation in the predicate charges alone did not warrant dismissal at the pre-trial stage because no prejudice to the accused was shown, the accused understood the charges, and statutory provisions and case law permit the prosecution to amend charges or adduce evidence to identify the mode; consequential quashing of AMLA charges is premature; application to set aside charges was therefore dismissed and trial dates maintained.

Citation
WA-64-22-03/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Applicant / Accused: PATHMARAJAH A/L MYSVAGANAM; Respondent / Public Prosecutor: PENDAKWA RAYA
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 May 2022
Case Number
WA-64-22-03/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Application to Set Aside Charges (interlocutory)
Outcome
Application dismissed in its entirety; charges maintained and trial to proceed
Legal Topics
Charge Particulars and Drafting, Mode of Participation/complicity, Amendment of Charges, Predicate Offence for Money Laundering, Pre Trial Dismissal
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Anti Money Laundering Law Charge Particulars and Drafting Mode of Participation/complicity Amendment of Charges Predicate Offence for Money Laundering Pre Trial Dismissal

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 20 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PATHMARAJAH A/L MYSVAGANAM

Applicant / Accused

PENDAKWA RAYA

Respondent / Public Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Application to Set Aside Charges (interlocutory)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to state the mode of participation in charges under s154 CPC renders the charges fatally defective and subject to being set aside under s173(g)
  2. 2 Whether AMLA charges must be quashed consequentially if the predicate offences are set aside
  3. 3 Whether the court should release the accused prior to trial on groundless charge basis

Ratio Decidendi

Failure to specify the mode of participation in the predicate charges alone did not warrant dismissal at the pre-trial stage because no prejudice to the accused was shown, the accused understood the charges, and statutory provisions and case law permit the prosecution to amend charges or adduce evidence to identify the mode; consequential quashing of AMLA charges is premature; application to set aside charges was therefore dismissed and trial dates maintained.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed in its entirety; charges maintained and trial to proceed

Orders

  • Application dismissed
  • Pertinent criminal trials to proceed on previously fixed dates (June 2022)