KOTA KINABALU: A 30-year-old father of three has been sentenced to a total of 126 years in prison and fined RM140,000, in default, 42 months’ imprisonment for forging 14 cheques totaling RM240,000.
Sessions Court judge Indra Ayub imposed the hefty sentence on Wan Junaidy Abd Majid after he pleaded guilty to all the charges.
Wan Junaidy committed the offences between March 29, 2011 and Feb 28 last year at the UOB Bank and had financial repercussion on the construction company, Jurutera Raja.
The charges were framed under Section 467 of the Penal Code which is punishable with imprisonment of up to 20 years’ prison term and a fine if found guilty.
The facts of the case stated that on April 4 last year, a police report was made by one Satsitnanda Rajaratnam (the complainant), owner of Jurutera Raja, alleging that cheques were forged by the company’s accountant. It stated that the forgeries were conducted from March, 2011 to February last year, and involved 14 cheques of the company.
Police investigations revealed that the amount written on the cheques had been manipulated by Wan Junaidy, who then settled them at the bank.
After a year of investigation, the police detained the accused at his home in Sandakan on October 26, this year.
During mitigation, counsel Goldam Hamid, representing Wan Junaidy, urged the court to impose a light sentence on his client, who had pleaded guilty, and thus saved the time and expenses of the court.
Goldam added that Wan Junaidy did not have any previous convictions and the sentence imposed should run concurrently.
Deputy public prosecutor Aida Fatimah, in rebuttal, urged the court to take into account the high level of trust that was placed on Wan Junaidy, which he betrayed for his own personal interest and he should have known what was right and what was wrong.
She added that had Wan Junaidy prioritised his family first, he should have not committed the offences in the first place.
Aidah also highlighted that the forged RM240,000 was not a small amount, and in so doing Wan Junaidy had tarnished the image of the company. His action had caused the company to suffer great loss and was unable to expand its business.
Goldam countered that it was only assumed by the prosecution that the company was unable to expand its business as there was no evidence to support the claim.
Wan Junaidy asked for a light sentence as he regretted what he had done, and promised the judge that he would not do it again in the future.