The Federal Supreme Court has affirmed a legal principle that the threat of others is not considered a crime of complaint, in which the case is not accepted three months after the victim's knowledge of the crime and its perpetrator.
The court ruled that a person who had been threatened by another was denied a claim that he had reported it three months after he had become aware of it and referred the case to the Court of Appeal for reconsideration.
The Public Prosecution referred a defendant to a criminal trial for threatening a person, demanding that he be punished in accordance with article 352 of the Federal Penal Code and its amendments.
The Court of First Instance ordered the defendant to be convicted and fined 2,000 dirhams for the charge he was charged and to charge him a fee of AED 50. The prosecution referred the civil right to the competent civil service. The Court of Appeal then ruled to cancel the first ruling and the judiciary not to accept the criminal case to be filed after the date. The prosecution has challenged him.
The prosecution stated in its appeal that the appeal ruling violated the law and made a mistake in its application. It ruled that the criminal action should not be accepted after the date of the case. According to Article 10 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, if the crime against the accused is a crime punishable by article 352 of the Penal Code, It is not one of the crimes of the complaint, which is limited to Article 10 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is defective and requires revocation.
The Federal Supreme Court upheld the appeal of the Public Prosecutor's Office, stating that the provisions of Article 10 of the Code of Criminal Procedure may only be filed in the following crimes, on the basis of a written or oral complaint by the victim or his legal representative: Fraud and treason, and conceal the things obtained from them, if the victim is a spouse of the offender or one of his assets; 2 - not handing over the minor to the right to ask him, to refrain from performing maintenance, insulting people and throwing them, and other crimes stipulated by law.
The same article provided that the complaint would not be accepted after three months from the date on which the victim was informed of the offense and the perpetrator, unless the law otherwise provides.
The court pointed out that the article indicates that the complaint is not accepted after three months from the date of the victim's knowledge of the crime and its perpetrator, and that it enumerated these crimes and its parties exclusively, noting that the appeal judgment established its jurisdiction not to accept the criminal action to be filed after the due date, Three months later.
She pointed out that the charge against the accused was the threat charge, which is punishable under article 352 of the Penal Code, explaining that this crime is not one of the offenses specifically enumerated in article 10 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which established the contested judgment. Has failed to understand the fact of the case, what he dragged to the violation of the law and error in its application, which must be revoked, to be with the veto referral.