A technical report exonerates a Gulf man from signing a check without balance

The Ras Al Khaimah Misdemeanors Court acquitted a (Khaliji) of the charge of signing a check worth 200,000 dirhams in bad faith and in a manner that prevents its payment, after the forgery and forgery examination report proved that the signature of the accused had been forged in a traditional way and that he had not written the signature attributed to him.

The Public Prosecution indictment stated that the accused in bad faith gave a contracting company a check worth 200,000 dirhams for which he did not have sufficient payment and deliberately signed it in a way that prevented its disbursement, and demanded that he be punished in accordance with the Commercial Transactions Law.

The case papers stated that a person submitted a report stating that the accused gave a contracting company in which he works a check for 200,000 dirhams without balance in bad faith.

During the prosecution’s investigations, the accused denied signing the check and stated that he handed the company’s engineer a blank check without any data, and accused the engineer of forging the check.

The forgery examination report stated that the accused did not write the signature attributed to him appended to the check and that the signature was forged in a traditional way, and that there was a difference between the signature of the check and the signature of the accused in the path of the written movement and in the direction of the final formation of the signature.

In the verdict of the Misdemeanors Court, it is undisputed that it is agreed by law and jurisprudence that criminal judgments are based on certainty and not on mere doubt and guesswork, and that doubt benefits the accused and is interpreted in his favour, pointing out that Article 211 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that if If the incident is not established or the law is not punishable by the court, the court shall acquit the accused and he shall be released if he is imprisoned for the incident alone.

She explained that not enough conclusive evidence was presented to prove that the accused had committed the act attributed to him, as the papers contained only the complainant's claim that was not supported by any firm evidence to support it, in return for the accused's denial, which was reinforced by the result of the report of the forgery and forgery examination unit, and accordingly the court in his presence acquitted the accused of what was attributed to him. mechanism.

Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news