Shah Alam files fraud charge over RM1.65 million durian orchard deal

Traders Union
All News
Business & Wealth
Shah Alam durian orchard fraud case

Highlights

Chan Huann Heng is accused of defrauding a victim of RM1.65 million in a durian orchard transaction on 5 February 2024 in Petaling, under Section 420 of the Penal Code.
The Shah Alam Sessions Court granted Chan bail of RM80,000 with one local surety and set 30 November for the next case mention.
The case highlights rising due diligence and documentation-verification risks in high-value agricultural land transactions, potentially undermining market confidence.

This article was translated from the original. Read the original version by our correspondent here.

Charge and court bail conditions

As reported by The Edge Malaysia, a businessman pleaded not guilty at the Shah Alam Sessions Court on Tuesday to a charge of deceiving a 66-year-old man in a durian orchard purchase transaction.

Chan Huann Heng, 58, is accused of deceiving the victim into transferring RM1.65 million from a company account using an invoice for the purchase of the orchard. The offence allegedly took place at a clubhouse on Jalan Kelab Tropicana in Petaling district on 5 February 2024, under Section 420 of the Penal Code.

If convicted, Chan, who is the chief executive officer of a vegetable import and export company, faces up to 10 years in prison, whipping and a fine. Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission deputy public prosecutor Muaz Ahmad Khairuddin proposed bail of RM100,000 with one surety, given the large sum involved.

Defence lawyer Dhanesh Subramaniam Nair, however, sought a reduction in the bail amount, arguing that his client's business had been affected by the case and that the accused had cooperated with investigators. Judge Dazuki Ali then granted bail of RM80,000 with one local surety and set 30 November for the next case mention.

Implications for agricultural asset transactions

The proceedings highlight governance and document-verification risks in high-value agricultural asset transactions, particularly those involving durian orchards with significant commercial value in Pahang. Cases like this typically increase scrutiny of due diligence, invoice verification and internal controls before payments are made from company accounts.

For the business community, a charge under Section 420 is also a reminder that transactions based on representations of ownership or asset sales require robust documentation and clear verification by relevant stakeholders. From a market perspective, any dispute or fraud allegation involving agricultural land transactions can undermine confidence in private transactions involving large amounts of capital.

In our previous report on the impact of the 1MDB scandal on corporate governance in Malaysia, we outlined how failures in controls, audits and checks and balances continue to fuel debate about board accountability and the role of auditors. The article also highlighted stronger whistleblower protections and the need for internal auditors to use data to identify risks earlier, rather than merely assess weaknesses after they have emerged.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.