ROSALIND TAN KHENG SUAN v. PEGUAM NEGARA MALAYSIA & ORS
COURT OF APPEAL, PUTRAJAYA
S NANTHA BALAN JCA
MOHD NAZLAN GHAZALI JCA
CHOO KAH SING JCA
[CIVIL APPEAL NO: P-01(A)-73-02-2023]
29 AUGUST 2025
[2025] CLJ JT (10)

Abstract – An order issued by the Public Prosecutor or an investigating officer to release seized funds to a third party is an administrative act and is therefore subject to judicial review. Under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, the power to determine legal ownership of seized property, particularly when ownership is in dispute, belongs to the civil courts, not the investigating officer or the Public Prosecutor. If a seized property is not forfeited, it must be returned to the person from whom it was seized. The investigating officer and the Public Prosecutor do not have the authority to unilaterally decide that a third party is lawfully entitled to the property, especially when there is a pending civil dispute regarding ownership.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Fundamental liberties – Right to property – Applicant's bank accounts seized following investigation for criminal breach of trust – Company obtained Mareva injunction against seized accounts while investigation was ongoing – Applicant not charged with any crime – Police/Public Prosecutor issued notices of release and instructed bank to release portion of seized funds to company – Whether decision to release funds violated applicant's fundamental right to property – Whether power to determine legal ownership of forfeited property in hands of police/Public Prosecutor – Whether s. 60(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 constitutional – Federal Constitution, art. 13(1)

COURTS: Civil courts – Jurisdiction – Applicant's bank accounts seized following criminal investigation for criminal breach of trust – Company obtained Mareva injunction against seized accounts while criminal investigation was ongoing – Applicant not charged with any crime – Police/Public Prosecutor issued notices of release and instructed bank to release portion of seized funds to company – Applicant not notified before release of funds – Whether civil courts had jurisdiction to hear matter as notices of release were issued pursuant to decision made in criminal matter/proceeding