WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

Prosecution failed to establish prima facie cases on all charges because essential elements were not proven: for s409 the requisite dishonest misappropriation was not shown; for s468 the prosecution failed to prove both that the 73 cheques were forged by the accused and the requisite intent to cheat; for s4(1)(b) AMLA the predicate unlawful origin and the accused's knowledge/suspicion were not established. Consequently the accused was discharged without being called to answer.

Citation
NA-62K-103-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Defendant: Wong Tze Wei
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
11 December 2025
Case Number
NA-62K-103-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Decision at Close of Prosecution (no Prima Facie Established; Accused Discharged Without Being Called to Present Defence)
Outcome
All charges dismissed at close of prosecution; accused discharged and released without being called to enter defence.
Legal Topics
Criminal Breach of Trust (s409 Penal Code), Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s468 Penal Code), Money Laundering (s4(1)(b) Amla/act 613), Prima Facie Threshold at Close of Prosecution, Forensic Handwriting Analysis, Authorised Signatory and Corporate Payment Procedures
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Anti Money Laundering Banking Law Evidence Law Criminal Breach of Trust (s409 Penal Code) Forgery for Purpose of Cheating (s468 Penal Code) Money Laundering (s4(1)(b) Amla/act 613) Prima Facie Threshold at Close of Prosecution +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Wong Tze Wei

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Decision at Close of Prosecution (no Prima Facie Established; Accused Discharged Without Being Called to Present Defence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether prosecution proved all elements of criminal breach of trust under section 409 (including dishonest intent)
  2. 2 Whether prosecution proved forgery under section 468 (authenticity of 73 cheque signatures and intent to cheat)
  3. 3 Whether prosecution proved money laundering under section 4(1)(b) AMLA (existence of predicate offence, disposal of proceeds and knowledge/suspicion)

Ratio Decidendi

Prosecution failed to establish prima facie cases on all charges because essential elements were not proven: for s409 the requisite dishonest misappropriation was not shown; for s468 the prosecution failed to prove both that the 73 cheques were forged by the accused and the requisite intent to cheat; for s4(1)(b) AMLA the predicate unlawful origin and the accused's knowledge/suspicion were not established. Consequently the accused was discharged without being called to answer.

Court Disposition

All charges dismissed at close of prosecution; accused discharged and released without being called to enter defence.

Orders

  • Accused discharged and released (dilepaskan dan dibebaskan)
  • Bail money returned to surety