Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments | LexChat

Malaysia Case Law

White-collar crime

  • 19 Dec 2025

    SHARIN SAFAMI BIN ZAINUDIN

    Citation
    CA-61R-5-02/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    CA-61R-5-02/2020 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Court convicted accused on all nine counts because prosecution established receipt of corrupt payments (bank deposits, ATM control, telephone/code links) beyond reasonable doubt augmented by the Section 50(1) presumption which the accused failed to rebut on the balance of probabilities; witnesses were found credible and accused's explanations were afterthoughts and not believable, warranting conviction and concurrent custodial sentences with fines.

  • 29 Jul 2024

    CHOW SIAN POH

    Citation
    WA-62K-185-07/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    WA-62K-185-07/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that sums paid to defendant were "deposits" under s136 and were accepted without requisite licence contrary to s137 FSA 2013; defendant's sworn testimony and denial failed to raise reasonable doubt; conviction is safe and a custodial sentence of four years imprisonment is appropriate and upheld.

  • 20 Jun 2024

    MUHAMMAD RA'ABILSHAH BIN SAMZALI

    Citation
    P-07-28-04/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
    Court
    Court of Appeal
    Case number
    P-07-28-04/2024 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

    The Court allowed the application for stay of execution and bail pending appeal because the applicant established special circumstances: first offender status, non-violent white‑collar nature of the offence, existence of complex legal issues meriting appellate review, negligible flight risk and prosecution's non‑opposition, subject to increased bail and continuation of prior conditions.

  • 8 May 2024

    MOHAMED NOOR BIN MOHAMED AMIN

    Citation
    WA-62K-226-11/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
    Court
    Sessions Court
    Case number
    WA-62K-226-11/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

    Prosecution established beyond reasonable doubt all elements of s.420: the complainant was induced by the accused to transfer RM400,000 on the false premise of a share purchase, the accused obtained the benefit and the complainant suffered loss; defence failed to raise reasonable doubt; accordingly accused convicted on all amended charges and sentenced to concurrent imprisonment terms (3 years, 4 years and 4 years) with no whipping and no fine given the accused's age and financial position.