In his broad grounds of judgment delivered on Wednesday, judicial commissioner Moses Susayan said he found Tan Hoo Eng’s rights under Articles 5(1) and 8(1) of the Federal Constitution were breached, based on compelling evidence of biased investigations and prosecutorial setbacks.
“This court concludes that the application should be allowed and all charges against her should be set aside, quashed or permanently stayed,” he said.
“Consequently, the applicant is acquitted and discharged.
“I also hold that this decision is essential to uphold the principles of justice, fairness and the rule of law, ensuring the full protection of the applicant’s rights, who is innocent until proven guilty.”
Susayan said his judgment addressed the complex and troubling circumstances surrounding the investigation and prosecution of Tan, exposing significant flaws where fairness and impartiality were severely compromised.
He said the investigating officers blatantly admitted the investigation’s bias and lack of fairness during the civil proceedings.
Furthermore, he said, the case involved multiple prosecutions with progressively reduced charges, revealing an acknowledged bias, including social interactions with the complainant and preferential treatment.
In coming to his decision, Susayan said, he was guided by the Federal Court decisions in Sundra Rajoo Nadarajah v Menteri Luar Negeri, Malaysia & Ors (2021) and Lee Kwan Woh v Public Prosecutor (2009).
The third decision Susayan relied on was the Supreme Court of India’s ruling in Babubhai v State of Gujarat and Others (2010).
Tan filed an application last year to set aside all her CBT charges under Section 409 of the Penal Code and the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (Amlatfa).
Susayan said the case involved a long-standing conflict between Tan and Lim Keck Eng, both directors and equal shareholders of Blue Star Moulding Sdn Bhd.
The legal dispute began with a police report by Lim accusing Tan of CBT, followed by a retaliatory report from Tan alleging threats and further CBT by Lim.
He said the multiple prosecutions and amendments to charges, during which there were altered amounts involved, raised questions about prosecutorial conduct and the fairness of the proceedings.
Tan faced multiple CBT and Amlatfa charges between July 2015 and July 2016 in the sessions court, but the prosecution sought a discharge not amounting to an acquittal in October 2017.
The prosecution then filed four CBT charges amounting to RM4.1 million and 54 Amlatfa charges to the tune of RM9.5 million in late 2017.
There were further amendments to the charges in August 2019.
Lawyer Gurbachan Singh represented Tan while deputy public prosecutors Nasrul Hadi Abdul Ghani and Geetha Jora Singh appeared for the prosecution.