WONG TZE WEI

WONG TZE WEI

Court found prosecution proved that accused was an agent and had control over company accounts (s409) but failed to prove dishonest misappropriation; prosecution failed to establish that 73 cheques were forged by accused because handwriting expert evidence was inconsistent and did not tie the accused to forgery (s468); prosecution therefore failed to establish predicate offences or the requisite knowledge/suspicion for AMLA counts (s4(1)(b) Akta 613). On the s180 prima facie test the court was not prepared to convict if accused remained silent and discharged and acquitted the accused at the close of prosecution.

Citation
NA-62K-7-03/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-7-03/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Close of Prosecution Accused Discharged (no Prima Facie Case)
Outcome
Accused discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution; no prima facie case made out on all charges.
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust (s409 Penal Code), Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s468 Penal Code), Money Laundering (s4(1)(b) AMLA 2001), Prima Facie Assessment (s180 Code), Evidentiary Weight of Handwriting Expert Evidence
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Fraud Forgery Anti Money Laundering Commercial Law Criminal Breach of Trust (s409 Penal Code) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s468 Penal Code) Money Laundering (s4(1)(b) AMLA 2001) +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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Wong Tze Wei

Defendant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved prima facie case under section 409 Penal Code (criminal breach of trust)
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved forgery and intent to cheat under section 468 Penal Code
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved money laundering under section 4(1)(b) AMLA 2001 including predicate offence and knowledge

Ratio Decidendi

Court found prosecution proved that accused was an agent and had control over company accounts (s409) but failed to prove dishonest misappropriation; prosecution failed to establish that 73 cheques were forged by accused because handwriting expert evidence was inconsistent and did not tie the accused to forgery (s468); prosecution therefore failed to establish predicate offences or the requisite knowledge/suspicion for AMLA counts (s4(1)(b) Akta 613). On the s180 prima facie test the court was not prepared to convict if accused remained silent and discharged and acquitted the accused at the close of prosecution.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution; no prima facie case made out on all charges.

Orders

  • Accused discharged and acquitted without being called to enter defence
  • All charges dismissed for want of prima facie case