No statutory requirement under AMLA for inquiry before issuance of Notices of Release.

Quay Chew Soon J:

Introduction

[1] This is a judicial review application by the Applicant to obtain an order of certiorari to quash 4 Notices of Release of Property (Money) dated 3 September 2021 ("Notices of Release"). The Notices of Release were issued by the 5th Respondent, with the consent of the 2nd Respondent (Deputy Public Prosecutor), under s 60(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 ("AMLA").

[2] The Notices of Release consist of:

(a) Notis Pelepasan Harta (Wang) dated 3 September 2021 issued to CIMB Bank Bhd/CIMB Islamic Bank Bhd/CIMB Investment Bank Bhd in respect of the sum of money of RM238.75 in the Applicant's fixed deposit account no 7019380040/07120010499520;

(b) Notis Pelepasan Harta (Wang) dated 3 September 2021 issued to CIMB Bank Bhd/CIMB Islamic Bank Bhd/CIMB Investment Bank Bhd in respect of the sum of money of RM279,520.75 in the Applicant's fixed deposit account no 8008696602;

(c) Notis Pelepasan Harta (Wang) dated 3 September 2021 issued to CIMB Bank Bhd/CIMB Islamic Bank Bhd/CIMB Investment Bank Bhd in respect of the sum of money of RM101,546.64 in the Applicant's fixed deposit account no 5800302774; and

(d) Notis Pelepasan Harta (Wang) dated 3 September 2021 issued to CIMB Bank Bhd/CIMB Islamic Bank Bhd/CIMB Investment Bank Bhd in respect of the sum of money of RM303,903,07 in the Applicant's fixed deposit account no 5003604936.

[3] I dismissed the judicial review application. Here are the grounds of my decision.

Background Facts

[4] Section 60 (1) of AMLA reads:

"Release of property seized

Where property has been seized under this Act, an investigating officer other than the investigating officer who effected the seizure, may at any time before it is forfeited under this Act, with the consent of the Public Prosecutor release such property to such person as the Public Prosecutor determines to be lawfully entitled to the property if the Public Prosecutor is satisfied that such property is not liable to forfeiture under this Act or otherwise required for the purpose of any proceedings under the Act, or for the purpose of any prosecution under any other law, and in such event neither the officer effecting the seizure, nor the Federal Government, or any person acting on behalf of the Federal Government, shall be liable to any proceedings by any person if the seizure and release had been effected in good faith".

[5] The Respondents aver as follows:

(a) The Penang Medical College Sdn Bhd ("PMC") had made police reports as per Dato Keramat Report 3514/2020 and Dato Keramat Report 3515/2020 ("PMC Police Report 1") dated 28 August 2020 against the Applicant;

(b) The investigation was carried out by Inspector Saiful Bahari bin Sukeri (Predicate Investigating Officer) from Bahagian Siasatan Jenayah Komersial (BSJK), IPD Timur Laut Pulau Pinang on the suspect (ie the Applicant) in relation to the PMC Police Report 1;

(c) The predicate case was investigated under s 408 of the Penal Code related to criminal breach of trust. The suspect (ie the Applicant) in this investigation was an employee at PMC since 2009 until December 2019, with the last position as the Financial Controller;

(d) Based on the predicate investigation, it was found that:

(i) The Applicant committed breach of trust since June 2019 until August 2019 and obtained the proceeds of the breach of trust activities with the amount of RM300,000.00;

(ii) The Applicant was suspected of committing breach of trust by taking money from PMC by means of manipulating the monthly salary payment transaction. To wit, crediting and entering 2 payments for each month namely a sum of RM9,168.60 into the Applicant's Maybank account no 107068702884 (actual salary) and an amount of RM100,000.00 (not salary payment)