SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2014 MarsdenLR 805

HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
BUN LIT CHUN – Appellant
Versus
PP – Respondent


Table of Content
1. charges under securities industry act. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's findings and sentencing details. (Para 3)

[1] The appellant with two others were originally charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court with one amended principal charge and another with an amended alternative charge for offences under the Securities Industry Act 1983 (Act 280). The Act has since been repealed and replaced with the new Capital Markets and Services Act 2007 (Act 671) ("CMSA"). As for the amended principal charge, they were charged in furtherance of a common intention of them, for a misleading appearance of active trading of Suremax Group Berhad (Company No: 334228-K) ("Suremax") shares on a stock market, that is Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad, through sale and purchase transactions of Suremax shares executed through the central depository securities accounts, which have the effect of raising the price of Suremax shares and therefore, committed an offence under s 84(1) of the Securities Industry Act 1983 ("SIA") read together with s 34 of the Penal Code (" PC "), punishable under s 88B of the SIA.

[2] As for the amended alternative charge, they were charged in furtherance of common inte

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top