KK Mart, socks supplier charged with hurting religious feelings

KK Mart founder Chai Kee Kan and his wife Loh Siew Mui, both directors of the company, claimed trial to a charge of deliberately hurting religious feelings at the Shah Alam Sessions Court this morning.

Chai, better known as KK Chai (above), and Loh were charged before judge Muhamad Anas Mahadzir under Section 298 of the Penal Code over the controversial socks bearing the word Allah.

Section 298 of the Penal Code stipulates offences related to deliberately hurting the religious feelings of others and carries a punishment of up to one year in jail, a fine, or both.

Three other individuals, who are the directors of Xin Jiang Chang Sdn Bhd - the socks supplier to KK Mart outlets nationwide - were also slapped with criminal charges in relation to the case.

Goh Li Huay, Soh Hui San and Soh Chin Huat were accused at the same court of abetting the convenience store chain under Section 109 of the Penal Code, read together with Section 298.

Section 109 states that the punishment for abetting a crime, unless specified, will be the same as the actual offence.

The three, who are related to each other, also pleaded not guilty to the charges.

Besides the individuals, the prosecution also charged KK Mart and Xin Jiang Chang as entities in the case.

Controversial socks

Two weeks ago, socks bearing the word Allah were found in a KK Mart store.

Mass police reports were lodged following initial police inaction.

One of those spearheading the police report campaign was Umno Youth chief Dr Muhamad Akmal Saleh.

Both KK Mart and Xin Jian Chang apologised for the incident and alleged it was due to oversight.

Previously, two individuals were sentenced to jail for six months and fined RM12,000 and RM15,000 respectively for posting insulting comments on the socks issue.

‘Good chance of winning’

One of the defence lawyers representing KK Mart and its two directors, believes they have a good chance of winning the case.

Rajpal Singh told Malaysiakini outside the courtroom that there should not have been a case against their clients in the first place.

"They (the prosecution) feel that they have a case, that's why they charge (my clients) today in court under Section 298 of the Penal Code.

"We leave it to the court to decide. My clients have pleaded not guilty, and they are innocent until proven guilty," he said.

When asked if the defence team has a good feeling that they can win the case, Rajpal replied: "Definitely".

During a press conference, another defence lawyer David Gurupatham urged all parties to leave it to the court to decide on the case.

“Now that the matter is in the courts, we hope that the relevant parties will refrain from making further statements as it could prejudice a fair trial.

“Allow justice to take its course,” he added.

KK Mart sues socks supplier for at least RM38m

Cops will take action against sock-gate vigilantes, Saifuddin assures

COMMENT | Let's have more good news, close sock-gate chapter

Socks issue: Lawyers call for swift, equal probe against vigilantes