KK Supermart & Superstore Sdn Bhd founder and executive chairman Chai Kee Kan and his wife, Loh Siew Mui, will submit representations to the Attorney-General’s Chambers over their charge of intentionally wounding the religious feelings of others.
Lawyer Rajpal Singh, representing Chai, 57, and Loh, 53, informed the sessions court he would file the representations, after studying the documents obtained from the prosecution today.
“We request that a mention date be fixed because the defence will file representations,” he said when the case was brought before judge Anas Mahadzir, reports Bernama.
On March 26, Chai and Loh, as directors of the company, pleaded not guilty to the charge of intentionally wounding the religious feelings of others over the sale of socks bearing the word “Allah”, as seen by a 32-year-old customer.
They were charged with committing the offence at their KK Mart outlet in Bandar Sunway, at 6.30am on March 13.
The charge was framed under Section 298 of the Penal Code, which provides for a prison sentence of up to a year or a fine, or both, if convicted.
Earlier, deputy public prosecutor Khairul Azreem Mamat said the prosecution would provide the defence with the documents related to the case today, in addition to requesting that the couple be tried together with directors of the distribution company Xin Jian Chang Sdn Bhd.
“The prosecution requested that these cases be tried together, in accordance with Section 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and I believe that the defence does not object.
“The prosecution also requested that the trial date be fixed,” he said, which was confirmed by defence counsel.
The court then set June 10 for case management to find out the status of the representations.
Also present at today’s proceedings was lawyer Lau Yi Leong, who represented Soh Chin Huat, his wife, Goh Li Huay, and their daughter, Hui San, who are the directors of Xin Jian Chang Sdn Bhd.
Soh, 61, Goh, 62, and Hui San, 36, were charged with conspiring to intentionally wound the religious sensitivities of Muslims in the issue of socks bearing the word “Allah”, at the same place, time and date.
They were charged under Section 109 of the Penal Code, read with Section 298 of the same law, which provides for a maximum prison sentence of one year or a fine, or both, if convicted.
Outside the court, Rajpal said the defence would submit the representations soon but has not yet decided whether it would be to withdraw the charge or to ask for an alternative charge. – The Vibes, April 29, 2024.
.jpg)
