mosque, embezzle, crime in UAE, crime in Hatta, UAE court

An Egyptian businessman stood trial at the Dubai Court of First Instance after he allegedly embezzled Dh1.71 million from a real estate firm.

Public prosecution records show that the 38-year-old businessman was the manager of a contracting company when he signed a contract with the plaintiff (the real estate firm) to build a mosque in Hatta.

He collected a cheque from the plaintiff and handed in return a bank deposit document, which was forged. He faces charges including fraud, forgery and use of forged documents. He is also accused of faking the seal of a bank.

A suspect, who allegedly helped him in these crimes, is at large.

A Jordanian accounts manager at the real estate company said that as per instructions from the owners of the company to construct a mosque in Hatta, they signed a contract with an engineering consultancy office. “The contract was for the office to prepare the designs and issue the necessary permits and then invite bids for the construction. A contracting firm, represented and run by the defendant, won the tender.”

The accused signed the contract on behalf of the company where he worked.

“Our company agreed to pay 10 per cent of the contract amount, which was about Dh1.1 million. The contracting firm gave a bank guarantee for the same amount,” the accounts manager told the prosecutor.

According to the manager, the defendant came in person to the headquarters of the company and handed the bank deposit document. Hence, a cheque worth Dh1.1 million was issued to the benefit of the contracting company and it was collected on its due date.

The contracting company began its works and was later paid an additional sum as per estimation by the contractor, which was approved by the consultant.

However, the contracting company later abruptly stopped the construction work. “After checking with the employees (of the contracting company), it was learned that the defendant had suddenly absconded and that the contracting company had been facing financial problems,” the accounts manager recounted during prosecution investigation.

The plaintiff then decided to present the bank deposit document. However, the bank notified them that the document is forged and was not issued from their side.

The trial will continue on January 23.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here