The parties to the dispute have failed in a Gulf charge to seize 20 million dirhams from the bank they are working on and spend on a young man or a brother, a brother and a third person, to reach a settlement and settle with the bank as the deadline expires.
The Abu Dhabi Criminal Court heard the arguments of the defense lawyers for the four defendants and the judiciary decided to set the date of November 7 as the date for the verdict in the case. The lawyer of the first defendant tried during the pleading to pin the failure of attempts to reach a settlement with the bank and the waste of money received from the bank, The second and third, indicating that his client offered the bank an amount of money to obtain a settlement, but the defendants refused to help and provide any funds, which caused the failure of the negotiations.
The court argued that the offense was considered a violation of the internal administrative regulations of the bank and that the defendant had obtained the financial amounts through borrowing rather than through seizure. Was to raise its credit limit, which enabled it to obtain funds.
He pointed out that the report of the competent medical committee, pointed out that the accused suffers from depression, and the ease of exposure to emotional blackmail because of the weakness of her personality and low perceptions and lack of experience of life, pointing out that the first accused took advantage of all those reasons in addition to his mother, which was related to the inspiration of his client to marry him .
"The defendant claimed that he owns a commercial land and a company that needs funds to lift the ban. The lifting will be done by taking the money from the bank, claiming that he will refund the money as soon as he can sell the land," he said during his defense.
In the conclusion of the pleading of the verdict, he sought to acquit his client and reject the civil suit filed by the bank. The bank has contributed to the fact that the money was taken. The defendant received 12 million dirhams and not 20 million as stated in the referral order and the accused returned 3 million to the bank.
The lawyer of the second and third accused also handed over a memorandum of defense, and the fourth defendant's lawyer handed over a warrant in which the patent was sought.
The details of the case are the result of a June 2007 report that the defendant, acting as head of an account division and responsible for the services of a bank, took the power of one of her colleagues, transgressed a transaction that was inconsistent with established procedures and fraudulently seized the money.
Investigations showed that the accused fined millions of dirhams on the second, third and fourth accused, along with cash, payment of debts, purchase of luxury cars and distinctive plates, travel to European countries on business classes, purchase of expensive gifts and precious hours of international brands .