Ras Al Khaimah Court acquitted her based on the experts’ report

A Gulf man accuses his wife of embezzling 6.6 million dirhams

A (Gulf) husband filed a lawsuit accusing his (Arab) wife of embezzling six million, 667,879 dirhams and 67 fils from two “massage and women’s bath” centers she was managing, concealing and destroying books and invoices, and appropriating the value of the products inside the two centers.

The Ras Al Khaimah Misdemeanour Court acquitted the accused as a result of the accusation's imbalance and stripping it of any evidence.

The wife’s attorney, lawyer Hanan al-Bayed, pointed to the maliciousness of the accusation and its fabrication by the complainant and the civil dispute between the spouses, due to the existence of previous marital disputes as a result of the husband’s refusal to register the massage center in the name of his wife, so she filed a civil lawsuit accusing him of seizing the massage center, and accordingly the husband fabricated a report of embezzlement to damage Abuse and maliciousness.

She pointed to the absence of the accusation against the wife for lack of evidence and the corruption of evidence of attribution derived from the complainant's statements for fabricating the complaint, pointing to the conflicting accounting reports, the contradiction of the complainant's statements and the lax reporting, demanding the innocence of her client of the two charges against her.

For his part, the husband assigned a consultant accounting expert to calculate the value of the financial embezzlement, and it was found that the total amounts seized by the wife amounted to six million, 667 thousand and 879 dirhams and 67 fils, and accused her of fraud, breach of trust, concealment and destruction of documents.

The reasons for the misdemeanour court ruling stated that the Public Prosecution issued a decision assigning the experts’ office to calculate the value of the embezzlement and verify the accounting books. Financial results from not keeping accounting books.

She explained that the office concluded that there was no evidence that the accused had embezzled any papers, documents or movables, and that after examining all the documents submitted to the experts, it was not found that the accused had embezzled the aforementioned sums of money in the report of the consultant accounting expert assigned by the complainant.

The court explained that it has been established from the papers that the reality of the dispute between the two parties is more than a dispute between the owner of an institution and its manager, but rather a dispute between a couple claiming ownership of the two centers, following up on that the report attributed to the accusation included that the husband bought the massage center from the previous owner under a waiver agreement, which is A date later than the case's history, which confirms the civil nature of the dispute between the two parties and casts shadows of doubt surrounding the accusation.

He added that as long as the judgments are not based on doubt and speculation, but on certainty and certainty, the court tends to rule the wife innocence of the accusation against her, and regarding the civil lawsuit, as long as the acquittal is penal, the civil lawsuit loses its legal basis, so the court rejects it and obliges the husband to pay her fees and expenses Accordingly, the court acquits the wife and rejects the civil case.

• It has been proven from the papers that the fact of the dispute between the two parties does not go beyond a dispute between a married couple.

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