SIBU: A man was indicted in the Magistrates’ Court for unlawful possession of RM17,895 on Thursday (Feb 24) .
Magistrate Mohd Syukri Mokhtar, after accepting the accused’s plea of guilty, fined Lee Liong Poo, 54, RM500, in default seven days’ imprisonment.
Lee, from Sg Pelek, Selangor, was charged with having RM17,895 that was unlawfully obtained at Jalan Tun Ahmad Zaidi Adruce at about 1.41pm on Jan 2, 2019.
The offence, framed under Section 37(1) of Minor Offence Ordinance Sarawak, reads that, “Any person who has in his possession or conveys in any manner anything which may be reasonably suspected of being stolen or unlawfully obtained shall, if he fails to account satisfactorily how he came by such thing, be guilty of an offence.”
The penalty provides for an imprisonment of three months and a fine of RM500 upon conviction.
Prosecuting officer Insp Badrul Iskandar Selamat told the court that initially the case was being investigated under Section 420 of the Penal Code for cheating.
He related that in September 2018, a male complainant aged 47 browsed the Facebook page under the name of Yi Qie Jie Yuan and saw an advertisement regarding free enquires related to health and family problems.
The complainant, who was in the process of divorce, wanted to ask for help and sent a message to the owner of the account.
The owner of the account told the complainant that there was one sifu (shaman) who could help him.
A week later, the complainant received a call from the sifu who asked him to make payment for the purpose of purchasing prayer equipment as well as a tail number to change his fate.
The complainant made seven transactions amounting to RM17,895 from Nov 30, 2018 to Jan 17, 2019 to a bank account in the name of the accused.
On Jan 18, 2019, the sifu again asked the complainant for a payment of RM3,400 as a thank you payment.
The complainant realised he had been deceived because the promised tail number was not given and the complainant’s phone number was also blocked after refusing to pay the RM3,400.
As a result of investigation, the bank had identified the accused to be the owner of the account.
The fine was paid.
