Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Topic

Money tracing and bank evidence

Legal area

Court

28 Feb 2023

[Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] MOHD SUHAIZAL BIN MAT SULAIMAN

Citation

BH-82-4-08/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BH-82-4-08/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Cumulative oral testimony (PW3, PW2, PW5, PW4, PW1) and documentary bank records established deception (fake offer letters and representations), dishonest and fraudulent inducement, and delivery/transfer of monies to the accused; accomplice testimony was admissible and credible in light of MACC Act; elements of cheating under s.415 and s.420 proven beyond reasonable doubt, justifying conviction and sentence.
28 Feb 2023

[Polis Diraja Malaysia (PDRM)] MOHD SUHAIZAL BIN MAT SULAIMAN

Citation

BH-82-03-02/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BH-82-03-02/2020 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused caused deception by issuing or presenting forged offer letters and other representations which induced PW3 to deliver monies totalling RM700,000; documentary bank records and witness testimony corroborated the money trail to the accused or his agents; MACC Act s.52(2) permits reliance on uncorroborated accomplice evidence where applicable; therefore elements of cheating under s.415 and offence under s.420 were established and conviction on both counts was warranted.