Imprisonment and deportation of 5 defendants who bought a vehicle with a check without balance
The “cassation” refused to accept the defendants ’appeal against the“ appeal ”ruling. Archives
The Court of Cassation in Abu Dhabi ruled that the appeal submitted by five accused of seizing a vehicle owned by the victim will not be accepted, by using fraudulent methods by taking an incorrect characteristic that would deceive him.
The details of the case relate to the Public Prosecution charging five defendants with having seized a vehicle owned by the victim, using fraudulent methods and taking an incorrect characteristic that would deceive him. The third accused agreed with him to buy his vehicle for 180 thousand dirhams in the name of the first accused and sent the fourth accused for inspection. The vehicle and deluded him to pay the amount in cash, and the first and fifth defendants accompanied him to the Traffic Department to transfer the vehicle’s ownership to the first accused. What carried the victim to transfer the vehicle’s ownership in his name, then the accused presented him with a check drawn up with the knowledge of the third defendant using the computer in the name of the second defendant’s company, drawn on a bank not He has a balance, and they were able to deceive him and make him transfer the ownership of the vehicle and deliver it to the first accused who seized it without paying the price.
The court of first instance ruled to punish the accused with imprisonment for a period of three years and to deport them outside the country after the execution of the sentence and confiscation of the check and its copy, and obliging the accused and the rest of the accused to pay the penal fees, so they appealed the judgment and the Appeal Court ruled in the presence of the appellant to accept the appeals in form and in the matter to amend the appealed judgment and be satisfied with imprisoning each of the six appellants. Otherwise, they were obligated to pay the due fees, and the judgment did not accept the accused, so they filed an appeal against him by way of cassation and presented a memorandum of the reasons for the appeal, and the Public Prosecution submitted a memorandum of opinion demanding in its conclusion that the appeal not be accepted in form.
The Court of Cassation clarified in its ruling that Article 245 of Federal Law No. 35 of 1992 promulgating the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that the appeal takes place with a report that includes the reasons for the appeal. The clerk of the court to which the appeal is submitted shall be deposited within 30 days from the date of issuance of the judgment, unless the judgment is deemed in presence. The date is valid from the day it was announced, and it ruled not to accept the appeal.