A young man (Gulf) tried to circumvent the rules of the periodic examination at the General Department for Drug Control in Dubai Police, by hiding a sample from his younger brother in a sensitive place on his body, to put it in the place of his sample, given that he was under the influence of drugs when he went on the scheduled date for the examination, but his matter was discovered And he was referred to the Criminal Court, which sentenced him to one year in prison for violating the periodic examination procedures, and a fine of 10,000 dirhams for the drug charge, and the Court of Appeal upheld the prison sentence.
In detail, the investigations of the Public Prosecution and the case papers revealed that the accused went to conduct the examination at the specified date that he had previously pledged to abide by, and by searching him before taking the sample from him, he found a large medical needle that he had hidden in a sensitive place containing a liquid, and by asking him he admitted that the sample belonged to his younger brother, and that he had brought it with him. In order to deceive in the delivery process, because he was a drug addict when he went for the examination, and he was afraid that his matter would be revealed.
The Public Prosecution directed the accused to use psychotropic substances in cases other than those authorized by law, and to violate the rules and procedures of the periodic examination, by doing an act that would replace or mix the examination sample.
After examining the case, the Court of First Instance imposed a fine of 10,000 dirhams on the charge of abuse, and one year in prison on the charge of violating the rules and procedures of periodic examination.
For its part, the Public Prosecution appealed the initial ruling before the Court of Appeal, calling it a mistake in applying the law by punishing the accused for each charge, while the two charges should have been linked, demanding that he be eliminated with one penalty, which is imprisonment with the abolition of the fine.
The defendant also appealed the verdict, and the defense submitted a memorandum in which he demanded that the appealed verdict be annulled in the second charge, and that he be acquitted, or that he be lenient with him, since he did not violate the procedures and rules of the periodic examination, but rather used psychotropic substances while undergoing the procedures.
After examining the two appeals submitted by the accused and the Public Prosecution, the Court of Appeal concluded that the first instance ruling had covered the case, including the legal elements of the crime, and cited plausible evidence for its proving, in addition to the defendant’s confession in the arrest report and the investigations of the Public Prosecution, which are evidence leading to what he arranged. Judgment without arbitrariness or inconsistency with the rule of reason and logic.
Regarding the obituary of the convict that he did not violate the periodic examination procedures, but rather used psychotropic substances while undergoing the examination, the Court of Appeal stated that it was an invalid obituary, as the accused violated the third clause of the periodic examination system, which stipulates that the accused is in violation of the system when performing any action. Substituting or mixing the test sample with any other substance.
And she explained that what is established in the arrest report, that when the accused was searched before taking a urine sample from him, he found a medical needle hidden under his clothes, containing a liquid, which is a sample he took from his brother with the aim of placing it in place of his sample, according to his confession before the police and the Public Prosecution, and then the court considers that his obituary inapposite.
While the court considered that the Public Prosecution’s appeal of the necessity of linking the two charges, and the application of the most severe punishment, is based on a valid basis, and then the Court of Appeal decided to cancel the fine and uphold the imprisonment sentence, and there is still another stage of litigation before the Court of Cassation.
#addict #sample #brother #circumvent #periodic #examination