WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case on all charges: although accused was shown to be an agent and authorised signatory, prosecution did not prove dishonesty or misappropriation (s.409); did not prove that the 73 cheques were forged by the accused or were in fact forged such that accused intended cheating (s.468) because expert handwriting evidence was inconsistent and no direct link to accused was established; and predicate offences/proceeds linkage and mens rea for AMLA offences were not proven (s.4(1)(b) Act 613). Accordingly accused was discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution.

Citation
NA-62K-90-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-90-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal Charges Under Penal Code (ss.409,468) and AMLA S.4(1)(b) / Close of Prosecution; Accused Discharged and Acquitted Without Being Called to Enter Defence
Outcome
Accused discharged and acquitted on all charges; no prima facie case found; 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 Assessment at Close of Prosecution, Handwriting Expert Evidence, Proof of Dishonest Intent, Proceeds of Unlawful Activity
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti‑money Laundering Banking and Finance Evidence Law Criminal Breach of Trust (s.409) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s.468) Money Laundering (s.4(1)(b) Amla) Prima Facie Assessment at Close of Prosecution +3 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Wong Tze Wei

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Charges Under Penal Code (ss.409,468) and AMLA S.4(1)(b) / Close of Prosecution; Accused Discharged and Acquitted Without Being Called to Enter Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution established prima facie case under s.409 Penal Code (criminal breach of trust)
  2. 2 Whether 73 cheques were forged and whether accused forged them contrary to s.468 Penal Code
  3. 3 Whether proceeds used in transactions constituted proceeds of unlawful activity and whether accused laundered them under s.4(1)(b) AMLA

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case on all charges: although accused was shown to be an agent and authorised signatory, prosecution did not prove dishonesty or misappropriation (s.409); did not prove that the 73 cheques were forged by the accused or were in fact forged such that accused intended cheating (s.468) because expert handwriting evidence was inconsistent and no direct link to accused was established; and predicate offences/proceeds linkage and mens rea for AMLA offences were not proven (s.4(1)(b) Act 613). Accordingly accused was discharged and acquitted at close of prosecution.

Court Disposition

Accused discharged and acquitted on all charges; no prima facie case found; released without being called to enter defence

Orders

  • Accused released and discharged without being called to enter defence
  • Bail/security returned to surety