An employee took advantage of his position as head of accounts in a company and embezzled four million and 215 thousand and 941 dirhams. He continued to deduct part of the financial amounts collected from the company’s clients, then wrote checks with them in the names of employees in his company, and asked them to cash them and deposit them in his personal account, as a kind of… of the duty cycle.
The company's management discovered the crimes committed by the head of accounts, after years of systematically committing them, and reported him to the competent authorities, and he was referred to the Public Prosecution in Dubai, which charged him with embezzling movable property handed to him by way of agency to harm the right holder, and he was referred to the misdemeanor court. Which punished him with one year imprisonment, fined him the embezzled amount, and deported him from the state. He appealed the ruling before the Court of Appeal, which upheld the initial ruling.
The details of the case, as stated in the Public Prosecution’s investigations, and which the court was reassured by, stated that the accused had been working as an account manager in one of the companies for about six years, and the nature of his work was dealing with clients, receiving sums of money from them and depositing them in the company’s accounts, and he had authorization to release Checks and cashing them, but instead of preserving what was entrusted to him, he seized for himself part of the financial sums that he collected from the company’s clients. He also wrote checks in the names of the company’s employees, and asked them to cash these sums and deposit them in his personal account, bringing the total sums that he embezzled to more than Of four million dirhams, harming the company's owner, he also refused to return those amounts to its owner.
The company's financial director reported that, after the inventory process, embezzlement emerged carried out by the head of accounts, and it was found that he was directing employees to deposit checks in his account without them participating in the crime, or knowing what he was doing, and he also admitted to this without pressure or coercion.
An accountant at the company, working under the defendant’s management, stated that he discovered that the latter had prepared checks with the names of employees, including the company’s driver, and asked them to deposit them into his account using a bank card.
Upon questioning the accused in the Public Prosecution’s investigations and the arrest report, he admitted to the charge against him, and added that he works as the company’s financial department manager, and is specialized in receiving amounts from clients and supplying them to the company’s accounts, as well as issuing checks in its name. He admitted that he issued checks and signed them in the name of a driver in the company, and asked him to He deposited it in bank accounts in four different banks, seizing an amount of four million and 215 thousand dirhams.
The accused retracted his statements before the court, claiming that he had received the aforementioned amount and deposited it in his account to invest it. His defense requested the appointment of an accounting expert, but the court refused.
The court stated in the merits of its ruling that it was satisfied with the accused’s confession in the evidence report and the Public Prosecution’s investigations, and it believed that the defense’s requests were not productive in the case, because they did not aim to deny the act constituting the crime, but rather they were intended to raise suspicion and cast doubt on the evidentiary evidence.
It indicated that the accused deliberately seized the amount of cash owned by the complaining party, which was delivered to him by proxy, and refused to return the amount. It ruled that he be convicted and imprisoned for a year, fined for the amount, and deported from the state. The Court of Appeal upheld the ruling.
#accounting #employee #embezzles #million #dirhams
