Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Cheating

Legal area

Court

15 Jun 2025

[ ] MOHD KHUZAIRY BIN SHAARI

Citation

DH-82-4-10/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DH-82-4-10/2023 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found the prosecution proved all elements of Section 420: the accused deceived the victim into believing her son was detained and required bail, the victim delivered jewellery and cash as a result, and the accused acted dishonestly to gain those items; the victim's in‑court identification, supported by an identification parade and investigation showing the son was not detained, was reliable and the defence alibi failed to raise a reasonable doubt.
4 Mar 2025

PETER ANTHONY

Citation

W-09-92-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

W-09-92-04/2023 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Unsigned charge sheet and alleged lack of fresh sanction were either inapplicable or minor irregularities not causing failure of justice; the DPP's consent under the MACC Act and authority to amend charges was sufficient; circumstantial evidence and contemporaneous conduct (possession and presentation of P2, benefit to appellant/company, witness testimony and demeanour) established that the appellant inserted the title with intent to cheat; SP3's police report did not demonstrate prejudice sufficient to overturn the conviction; sentence was not manifestly excessive — appeal dismissed and conv…
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)

The court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused dishonestly induced Jakel Trading to part with RM400,000 by representing a company purchase that did not exist; the accused failed to raise reasonable doubt; convicted on all amended charges under s.420 and sentenced to imprisonment of 3 years (first count), 4 years (second), and 4 years (third) to run concurrently; no whipping and no fine imposed due to age and financial circumstances.
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.
17 Aug 2023

GUNALAN A/L SAGARAN (berurusaniaga atas nama dan gaya sebagai FUTURE RISE AGENCY ) 1. ) MOHD NASRI BIN ABDUL RAHIM 2. ) MUHAMAD ERMAN BIN OMAR HATTAB 3. ) HASWIRA AIMAN BIN HASSAN MERICAN 4. ) NAR TRADING TRADERS SDN. BHD. 5. ) ABDUL WAHAB

Citation

PA-22NCvC-98-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-22NCvC-98-05/2021 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The court held that the plaintiff's statement of claim against Defendants 1–4 disclosed a reasonable cause of action and was not plainly or obviously unsustainable, scandalous, frivolous or an abuse of process; therefore the striking out application under Order 18 r 19(1) must be dismissed and the matter proceeded to trial so the disputed facts and allegations of fraud/cheating can be determined.
21 Nov 2022

Mat Aris Bin Saad

Citation

TA-83-252-07/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

TA-83-252-07/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that both accused deliberately represented state land as their own, induced the complainant to deliver money, and had dishonest intent from the outset; the defence explanations were implausible and failed to raise reasonable doubt, therefore both accused are guilty under s.420 Penal Code and liable to custodial sentences and fines.
17 Feb 2022

[ ] ROSILA BINTI ISMAIL

Citation

DA-83-141-03/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

DA-83-141-03/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

On maximum evaluation the prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of section 417: there was no clear evidence the accused deceived and intentionally induced the complainant to surrender the title; the transaction was consensual/security or sale to the lender and inconsistencies favoured the accused; mere breach of contract does not amount to cheating; therefore no prima facie case and accused acquitted and discharged.
3 Sept 2021

PENDAKWARAYA Timbalan WANG JIANQUAN (Chinese National)

Citation

BH-83-1010-08/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BH-83-1010-08/2021 (Mahkamah Majistret)

Given the admitted facts, conviction on the plea was appropriate; the aggravated manner of the love‑scam (recording and use of obscene material to extort) and the prevalence of online fraud justified a custodial sentence despite first‑offender status and guilty plea; the court imposed one month imprisonment from date of arrest and RM8000 fine, and dismissed the stay application because no special circumstances were shown and risk of absconding existed for a foreign national under s.311.
23 Apr 2021

PENDAKWARAYA YAZID MUSTAQIM BIN ROSLAN SHAKUNTALA DEVI A/P KUMAR

Citation

PA 83-129-01/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

PA 83-129-01/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused knowingly made false representations about being able to procure employment, used the reputation of a defunct company to induce reliance, caused the complainant to transfer RM100,000 into accounts controlled by the accused and her sister, and the defence failed to raise a reasonable doubt; accordingly the accused was convicted under s.420 Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment and fine, and applications for suspension and instalment payment were refused.
5 Mar 2021

PENDAKWARAYA Timbalan Foong Ting Jun

Citation

BH83-728-06/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)
Court

Magistrates' Court
Case number

BH83-728-06/2019 (Mahkamah Majistret)

The court found the investment agreement and subsequent payments evidenced genuine arrangements to secure the artist; there was no evidence of deception at the time of inducement and no dishonest or fraudulent intention by the accused to cause wrongful gain or loss, therefore the essential elements of s.420 Penal Code were not established and the accused was acquitted at the end of the prosecution's case.