RM55,000 fraud: Ex-bank teller claims trial to CBT, forgery charges
ALOR STAR: A former bank teller pleaded not guilty in the Sessions Court here today to eight charges of criminal breach of trust (CBT) and forgery involving RM55,000 from a religious academy's bank account, allegedly committed three years ago.
The accused, Mohd Abd Rahman Hamzah, 41, who is currently employed as a car salesman, entered his plea before Judge N. Priscilla Hemamalini.
According to the charge sheets, the offences were allegedly committed at the bank's Kuala Nerang branch in the Padang Terap district between April and June 2022.
Four of the charges pertain to CBT under Section 408 of the Penal Code, in which Abd Rahman is accused of dishonestly withdrawing and misappropriating a total of RM55,000 from the Akademi Al-Quran dan Dakwah Ummah's bank account without authorisation.
The remaining four charges, framed under Section 471 of the Penal Code, relate to the alleged use of falsified withdrawal forms as genuine documents. These offences are punishable under Section 465 of the same Act.
The transactions in question involved two withdrawals of RM10,000, as well as withdrawals of RM15,000 and RM20,000 — all from the same account.
If convicted, the CBT charges carry a prison sentence of between one and 14 years, whipping, and a fine. The forgery charges carry a penalty of up to two years' imprisonment, a fine, or both.
Deputy public prosecutor Vatchira Wong Rui Fern appeared for the prosecution. The accused was unrepresented.
Wong proposed bail of RM20,000 for each charge, but the accused appealed for a lower amount, citing full cooperation during the investigation and financial hardship.
He informed the court that he earned RM1,000 a month as a car salesman and supports his wife, two children, and his ailing mother.
The court set bail at RM28,000 for all charges combined and fixed June 15 for mention.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- New Straits Times
DAP to issue statement on Teoh Beng Hock case, says Loke
PETALING JAYA: DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke said his party will issue a statement on the Teoh Beng Hock case soon. He however did not indicate a specific time for the statement's release. "We will issue a statement," he said at a press conference after the Higher Education Ministry's Ilmuan Malaysia Madani forum titled "Transport for the People: Balancing Affordability, Quality and Sustainability of Public Transport." Yesterday, it was reported that the sister of Teoh Beng Hock demanded transparency and accountability from the authorities after the Attorney-General's Chambers (A-GC) and police decided not to pursue further action in the 2009 case. Beng Hock's sister, Lee Lan expressed her dismay over the decision for no further action (NFA), especially given that multiple court rulings had established the death was not due to suicide or an accident. She said that the Court of Appeal had ruled in 2014 that Beng Hock's death was caused by the actions of individuals, including Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officers, and demanded that the police investigate the case under the proper criminal provisions. She also called for those currently in the government to act appropriately as they had in the past stood by the fact that he was killed. Last month, the Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement called for DAP's five ministers to resign in protest over the NFA. Association chairperson Ng Yap Hwa said the ministers - Loke, Gobind Singh Deo, Nga Kor Ming, Sim Chee Keong, and Hannah Yeoh - should take responsibility on the party's behalf for failing to fulfil promises to seek justice for Beng Hock. Beng Hock's family had earlier been informed by police that their latest investigation into the case had been classified as requiring no further action or NFA. On Nov 21 last year, the High Court had directed the police to complete their long-delayed investigation into the death more than 15 years ago. Beng Hock died on July 16, 2009 at the fifth floor of Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam, after being questioned for hours by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). An inquest was held and the coroner returned an open verdict. However, the Court of Appeal in 2014 ruled that his death was caused by "one or more persons unknown", including MACC officers. In 2019, police launched an investigation under Section 342 of the Penal Code for wrongful confinement. Prior to 2018, two special investigation teams were set up – one in 2011 and the other in 2015 – to look into Teoh's death, but both cases were classified as NFA by the public prosecutor.
Daily Express
3 hours ago
- Daily Express
Court to hear Muhyiddin's reference bid on August 28
Published on: Wednesday, June 04, 2025 Published on: Wed, Jun 04, 2025 By: Ho Kit Yen, FMT Text Size: Former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin is accused of making seditious statements during the Nenggiri by-election in Gua Musang, Kelantan, last year. (Bernama pic) Kuala Lumpur: The High Court here will hear Muhyiddin Yassin's bid to refer legal questions to the apex court on the validity of certain provisions under the Sedition Act on Aug 28. The former prime minister is accused of making seditious statements during the Nenggiri by-election in Gua Musang, Kelantan, last year. Justice Jamil Hussin fixed the date after lawyer Joshua Tay, appearing for Muhyiddin, told the court that the defence and prosecution had agreed on the date. The court then instructed the prosecution and defence to file their submissions by Aug 14. Deputy public prosecutor Razali Che Ani appeared for the prosecution. Muhyiddin allegedly said he was not invited by the then Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be sworn in as prime minister following the 2022 general election, despite having obtained the majority support of 115 MPs. If found guilty, the Perikatan Nasional chairman and Bersatu president will face a jail term that could extend to three years or a maximum fine of RM5,000. Muhyiddin was initially charged at the Gua Musang sessions court in August last year. On Nov 27, Justice Azmi Abdullah allowed his application to have the case transferred to the Kuala Lumpur High Court. * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available. Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
![[UPDATED] High Court rejects Anwar's bid to refer constitutional questions to federal court [WATCH]](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fimages%2Farticles%2FPMXjudge_NSTfield_image_socialmedia.var_1749022242.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
New Straits Times
3 hours ago
- New Straits Times
[UPDATED] High Court rejects Anwar's bid to refer constitutional questions to federal court [WATCH]
KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has failed in his bid to refer eight constitutional questions to the Federal Court regarding the legal provisions on the immunity of a sitting prime minister. High Court Judge Roz Mawar Rozain dismissed the application, ruling that it did not meet the requirements under Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act (CJA). "Having considered the affidavits, the eight proposed questions, and submissions of all parties (both written and oral), this court is not satisfied that the statutory threshold under Section 84 of the CJA is met. "The questions posed are speculative, not necessary to the disposal of this case, and do not concern the interpretation or validity of any constitutional provision," she said in her decision. Anwar's application is linked to a sexual assault lawsuit filed against him four years ago by his former research officer, Muhammed Yusoff Rawther. The trial is scheduled to begin on June 16. Roz Mawar said the proposed constitutional questions failed to meet the statutory threshold under the section, and that not every question referencing the Federal Constitution warrants referral. "The Federal Court is not a forum for speculative advisory opinions. "Furthermore, the defendant (Anwar) has affirmed readiness to proceed with trial and there is no evidence that the suit impairs his ability to perform constitutional duties. "This court finds no special circumstances warranting a stay of proceedings," she said. Roz Mawar awarded RM20,000 in costs to Yusoff Rawther. She also ruled that the June 16 trial will proceed. After the proceedings, Anwar's lawyer Datuk Seri Rajasegaran Krishnan said they will file a notice of appeal at the Court of Appeal. On May 23, Anwar applied to the High Court to refer eight legal questions to the Federal Court, which included whether he possesses immunity from a civil suit filed by Yusoff. Anwar had sought the apex court to rule whether Articles 5,8, 39,40 and 43 of the constitution grant him qualified immunity from Yusoff's suit. Yusoff had filed the suit before Anwar became prime minister on Nov 24, 2022. Anwar had asked the court to decide whether Yusoff's suit would impair the effective discharge of his executive duties and undermine the constitutional separation of powers. Anwar had also requested the court to consider whether the lawsuit impacts his ability to carry out executive duties and undermines the principle of separation of powers guaranteed by the constitution. Previously, Anwar's senior political secretary Datuk Seri Shamsul Iskandar Mohd Akin had said there was no attempt in the application to seek absolute immunity. He said Anwar's application to the Federal Court is a lawful process to seek clarity from the court on his position in carrying out official duties when facing a civil suit based on claims that precede his appointment as prime minister. Shamsul Iskandar had said the issue is whether such civil action could interfere with the efficiency of a prime minister in carrying out the executive functions of the state. He had said it is a legitimate and lawful matter to be referred to the Federal Court, the highest judicial institution in the country, with the jurisdiction to interpret the constitution fairly and objectively.
