WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

The court held the prosecution failed to prove essential elements of the charged offences: it did not prove dishonest conversion under s.409, did not establish that the 73 checks were forged by the accused nor that they were shown to be forged with sufficient certainty under s.468, and failed to prove the proceeds were from predicate offences or that the accused had knowledge/reasonable suspicion under AMLA s.4(1)(b). Accordingly no prima facie case existed and the accused was discharged and acquitted without being called to enter his defence.

Citation
NA-62K-111-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-111-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Acquitted at Close of Prosecution
Outcome
Accused released and acquitted; discharged without being called to enter defence for all charges.
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust (section 409 Penal Code), Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (section 468 Penal Code), Money Laundering (section 4(1)(b) Amla/act 613), Prima Facie Assessment at Close of Prosecution
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Money Laundering Commercial Crime Banking/financial Regulation Criminal Breach of Trust (section 409 Penal Code) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (section 468 Penal Code) Money Laundering (section 4(1)(b) Amla/act 613) Prima Facie Assessment at Close of Prosecution

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Wong Tze Wei

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Acquitted at Close of Prosecution

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established prima facie case under section 409 Penal Code (criminal breach of trust)
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved forgery under section 468 Penal Code (73 CIMB checks)
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved money laundering under section 4(1)(b) AMLA (Act 613)

Ratio Decidendi

The court held the prosecution failed to prove essential elements of the charged offences: it did not prove dishonest conversion under s.409, did not establish that the 73 checks were forged by the accused nor that they were shown to be forged with sufficient certainty under s.468, and failed to prove the proceeds were from predicate offences or that the accused had knowledge/reasonable suspicion under AMLA s.4(1)(b). Accordingly no prima facie case existed and the accused was discharged and acquitted without being called to enter his defence.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

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