WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

Court held prosecution failed to prove essential elements of the offences at the close of its case—in particular the element of fraudulent/dishonest misuse (s.409), authorship and dishonest use of forged signatures (s.468) and that the funds were proceeds of predicate offences known or suspected by the defendant (s.4(1)(b) AMLA)—and therefore no prima facie case existed; defendant discharged and freed without being called to enter defence.

Citation
NA-62K-93-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-93-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Close of Prosecution Case Accused Discharged (no Prima Facie)
Outcome
Defendant discharged and released without being called to enter defence (no prima facie case)
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 (s.180 Cpc), Handwriting/expert Signature Evidence, Burden of Proof
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Commercial Crime (breach of Trust) Forgery Anti Money Laundering Banking/financial Transactions Evidence and Expert Testimony Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409 Penal Code) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468 Penal Code) +4 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

Prosecution

Wong Tze Wei

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case for 17 counts under s.409 Penal Code (criminal breach of trust)
  2. 2 Whether prosecution established a prima facie case for 73/78 alleged forged CIMB cheques under s.468 Penal Code (forgery for purpose of cheating)
  3. 3 Whether prosecution established money laundering under s.4(1)(b) AMLA based on alleged predicate offences and the defendant's knowledge/suspicion

Ratio Decidendi

Court held prosecution failed to prove essential elements of the offences at the close of its case—in particular the element of fraudulent/dishonest misuse (s.409), authorship and dishonest use of forged signatures (s.468) and that the funds were proceeds of predicate offences known or suspected by the defendant (s.4(1)(b) AMLA)—and therefore no prima facie case existed; defendant discharged and freed without being called to enter defence.

Court Disposition

Defendant discharged and released without being called to enter defence (no prima facie case)

Orders

  • Defendant discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution on all charges
  • Bail returned to surety