Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Forgery for purpose of cheating (s468 penal code)

Legal area

Court

11 Dec 2025

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

Citation

NA-62K-103-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

NA-62K-103-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

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.
11 Dec 2025

WONG TZE WEI

Citation

NA-62K-7-03/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

NA-62K-7-03/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Court found prosecution proved that accused was an agent and had control over company accounts (s409) but failed to prove dishonest misappropriation; prosecution failed to establish that 73 cheques were forged by accused because handwriting expert evidence was inconsistent and did not tie the accused to forgery (s468); prosecution therefore failed to establish predicate offences or the requisite knowledge/suspicion for AMLA counts (s4(1)(b) Akta 613). On the s180 prima facie test the court was not prepared to convict if accused remained silent and discharged and acquitted the accused at the c…
11 Dec 2025

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

Citation

NA-62K-89-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

NA-62K-89-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Court found prosecution proved agency and control elements for s409 but failed to prove dishonesty/curang element; prosecution failed to prove cheques were forged by accused or that accused had requisite dishonest intent under s468; prosecution failed to prove predicate offences and knowledge/suspicion required for AMLA. Therefore no prima facie case existed on any charge and accused was discharged without being called to enter defence.
11 Dec 2025

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

Citation

NA-62K-94-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Court

Sessions Court
Case number

NA-62K-94-12/2021 (Mahkamah Sesyen)

Prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case on all counts: although accused was shown to be an authorized signatory and to control accounts, there was no reliable evidence of dishonest appropriation (s409), no convincing proof that the 73 cheques were forged by the accused or that they were issued for the purpose of cheating (s468), and the predicate offences and accused's knowledge or suspicion required under AMLA s4(1)(b) were not proved; expert signature evidence was internally inconsistent and material witnesses confirmed payments benefitted the company or were made on management i…

Malaysia Case Law

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG

WONG TZE WEI @ JAMES WONG