The Court of Cassation has overturned the Court of Appeal's decision to punish those accused of seizing 390,000 dirhams from a woman, after she was accused of gaining money and seizing her bank statements, with a month in prison and deportation.
The Public Prosecution has charged the seven defendants with seizure of a cash amount owned by the victim, by fraudulently using the illusion that it won a sum of money, and managed to deceive her and make her bank account statements, through the Internet And requested that they be punished in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Law on Combating Information Technology Crimes.
The court of first instance ruled in absentia the second, fourth, fifth and sixth defendants, and in presence of the first, third and seventh defendants, to punish the first, second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth defendants for the crime of fraud and fraud by imprisonment for a month with deportation from the state, while obliging them to pay the fee, and acquitting the seventh defendant. Is attributed to him.
The first and third convicts appealed the verdict, and the Court of Appeal ruled that the appeal was in form, and in the matter rejected it and supported the appellant judgment and bind the appellants with fees, and the appeal did not satisfy the appellants and we appealed to him before the Court of Cassation Abu Dhabi.
He appealed to the two appealed against the verdict contested wrong in the application of the law and failure to cause and corruption in the inference and breach of the right of defense, pointing out that the verdict contested the conviction, taking into account the reasons for the appeal, and that the latter did not indicate the elements of the crime, which condemned them, and their relevance to the facts of the monument, and the role of each One of them is how to fraud and the fraudulent ways they carried out and the link between them and the victim.
The appeal note pointed out that the complainant's statements are not sufficient in proving the crime to the appellants, and that the investigation report was limited to knowing the beneficiary of the amounts transferred from the complainant's account to the appellants' account, and that the contested verdict did not concern the documents submitted by the appellant and did not respond to them and turned down their request. Hearing witnesses denied the attendees of the hearing, which is flawed by the verdict and requires revocation.
The court pointed out that the victim claimed that an unknown person practiced fraudulent methods with her by deluding her that she won a sum of money and forced her to disclose and give her bank account information to him, and seized the amount of 390 thousand dirhams from her account, while the investigations did not reveal the identity of the person who carried The appellant explained the reason for the subject of the transfer, the source of the transferred amounts, the reason for the transfer, and the purpose of the transfer, while the indictment failed to prove that the appellants committed the crime of fraud and fraud or a relationship between the appellants and the victim.
The Court of Cassation pointed out that the convictions do not indicate that the appellants have committed the crime assigned to them with regard to contacting an unknown person to seize the victim's funds, it is tainted with inadequacies, and the circumstances of the case call into question the absence of evidence. Appellants of the charge against them and refund the amount of insurance. The court ruled that the appealed judgment was overturned, the appealed judgment overturned, the appellate acquitted of the charge against them and the security deposit refunded.
The appeal note pointed out that the complainant's statements are not sufficient in proving the crime to the appellants.