M Athimulan, representing Bung, informed sessions court judge Rosli Ahmad today the defence team had received the Court of Appeal’s broad grounds of judgment on Feb 3 and will file their application shortly.
Upon filing the application, he said, the defence will apply to the sessions court for a stay of the trial, which has been scheduled to run from April 9 to 11, April 14 and 15 and May 5 and 6.
Lawyer K Devkumar, representing Zizie, was also present in court.
Deputy public prosecutor Fadly Zambry had no objections but insisted that the defence file a formal stay application.
“In the meantime, we request the court to retain the hearing dates. If the court dismisses the stay application, we ask that the witnesses provide written statements,” he said.
The court fixed March 11 for mention.
The prosecution and the defence returned to the trial court in December last year after the Court of Appeal on Nov 18 reversed Bung and Zizie’s acquittal by the High Court.
Justice Zaini Mazlan, who read the appellate court’s broad grounds of decision, said the revision application filed by the couple in the High Court was akin to an appeal.
Bung, then the non-executive chairman of Felcra, was charged on May 3, 2019 with two counts of receiving bribes of RM2.2 million and RM262,500 as an inducement to obtain Felcra’s approval to invest RM150 million in Public Mutual unit trusts.
He is alleged to have accepted the bribes from Public Mutual’s investment agent Norhaili Madhi through Zizie at the Taman Melawati Public Bank branch between 12.30pm and 5pm on June 12, 2015.
He was also charged with receiving a bribe of RM337,500 from Norhaili under Zizie’s name at the same location on June 19, 2015.
Zizie faces three charges of abetting Bung in the commission of the alleged offences.
On Sept 2, 2022, the sessions court ordered the couple to enter their defence as the prosecution had established a prima facie case against them.
On Sept 7 last year, the High Court, which heard a revision application brought under Section 323 of the Criminal Procedure Code, acquitted the duo. However, that decision was set aside on appeal.