WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

The prosecution failed to prove all essential elements of the charged offences. Although agency and control of company funds by the accused were established, dishonesty necessary for criminal breach of trust under s.409 was not proven. Forgery under s.468 failed because the prosecution's handwriting/expert evidence was contradictory and did not prove the accused forged the 73 cheques, and there was evidence transactions were authorized company payments. Consequently predicate offences for AMLA were not established and the requisite knowledge/reasonable suspicion under s.4(1)(b) was not proven. On the prima facie test the court would not be prepared to convict if accused remained silent;...

Citation
NA-62K-107-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Public Prosecutor; Defendant: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-107-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal (penal Code Offences and Amla) / Close of Prosecution Case — Judge Discharged Accused; No Prima Facie Found
Outcome
Accused discharged and acquitted on all charges; released without being called to enter defence
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409), Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468), Money Laundering (s.4(1)(b) Amla), Prima Facie Test at Close of Prosecution, Handwriting/expert Evidence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Commercial Crime Anti‑money Laundering Banking/forgery Evidence Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468) Money Laundering (s.4(1)(b) Amla) 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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Prosecutor

Prosecution

Wong Tze Wei

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal (penal Code Offences and Amla) / Close of Prosecution Case — Judge Discharged Accused; No Prima Facie Found

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether accused was an agent entrusted with company funds
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved dishonest criminal breach of trust under s.409
  3. 3 Whether 73 CIMB cheques were forged by accused under s.468

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution failed to prove all essential elements of the charged offences. Although agency and control of company funds by the accused were established, dishonesty necessary for criminal breach of trust under s.409 was not proven. Forgery under s.468 failed because the prosecution's handwriting/expert evidence was contradictory and did not prove the accused forged the 73 cheques, and there was evidence transactions were authorized company payments. Consequently predicate offences for AMLA were not established and the requisite knowledge/reasonable suspicion under s.4(1)(b) was not proven. On the prima facie test the court would not be prepared to convict if accused remained silent;...

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and acquitted on all charges; released without being called to enter defence

Orders

  • Accused discharged and acquitted on all charges
  • Bail returned to surety