The first case of a Gulf woman accused of insulting and threatening her brother-in-law as a result of disagreements between the two parties, where the indictment said that the accused threatened the victim to tell her, (Rahhal left from the country), and Because of her.


The defendant before the court denied the charges against her, and claimed that the victim insulted and quarreled with her, while the victim and her husband denied the charges against her by the accused.
The court tried to reconcile the victim and the defendant, where the victim agreed with the encouragement of her husband to reconcile, but the defendant refused the reconciliation and insisted on completing the court on charges of insulting the victim, and the court reserved the case for the verdict on Monday.


In the second case, the court considered the case of a couple of Gulf men accused of insulting each other with deceptive words of modesty and honor by submitting a memorandum of defense before the Personal Status Court, which included indecent expressions and offenses written by each party against the other in self-defense.


According to the indictment, the husband accused the first defendant in his defense memorandum before the Personal Status Court three words insulting his wife, where the defendant denied the accusation against him in the court and stated that he listed the facts that occurred between him and his wife and wrote them in the defense memorandum, also prosecutors accused the wife The defendant, who submitted a defense memorandum containing insulting statements against her husband, where the wife denied the charge and stated that it is not contained in the defense memo an account of the facts.


For his part, the defense lawyer for the victim submitted a memorandum of civil prosecution and stuck to amend the registration and description of the accused from defamation charge to defamation, and asked the defense acquitted his client of the charges against her.


He added that the UAE project singled out the crime of libel article 378 and said that libel included the attribution of a particular incident that makes the victim subject to contempt of honor or offer, and that the legislator singled out article 373, which does not include the attribution of a certain fact, which means that the distinction between insult And slander is based on a certain incident.


He explained that all that was contained in the defendant's defense memorandum was defamatory words against the victim and defamed them because he was assigned to them things affecting the presentation and honor, and pointed out that the defense is ashamed to mention.
He pointed out that the Public Prosecution demanded the application of the punishment on the accused in accordance with Article 373, on charges of insult, although what was stated in the defendant's defense memorandum was clear defamation and not a spa, adding that the evidence of libel against the defendant with its physical and moral pillars fixed a certainty because he gave the victim charges For punishment and contempt and touched by the display and honor, and can not be considered tossing them in self-defense.
He added that he was seeking his client's innocence for the absence of a crime in the case papers because article 53 of the Penal Code states that there is no crime if the act occurs in good faith.He added that the words in his client's defense memorandum do not include insults but include legal words and making evidence according to law.


He pointed out that the absence of the elements of the crime in the case papers because the words in the memorandum are commonplace in the legal work and do not contain any insults or cursing and that it was in response to the accusations made by the accused to his client, and continued that his client does not intend to assign a cursing or cursing or incitement Honor and consideration of the accused.


For his part, the defendant submitted a memorandum to defend himself and asked to postpone the case to submit a memorandum of civil prosecution, where the court set a hearing next Monday as the date for the verdict.
Paint the case