A (Gulf) wife lost a case she filed against her (Gulf) husband accusing him of threatening and insulting her with words that offend honor and consideration, because the husband denied what was attributed to him in the investigation stages and the lack of evidence, and accordingly the Ras Al Khaimah Misdemeanors Court ruled that he was innocent of what was attributed to him.
In detail, the wife stated in the investigations that her husband constantly assaulted her and that she was surprised on the day of the incident that he returned home in a nervous state and knocked on the door forcefully until he broke it and entered the house.
She explained that he took her phone and asked her for the secret number, and she was afraid of him, took her son and left the house, and took a digital memory containing an audio recording containing threatening phrases, and the husband denied what was attributed to him in the Public Prosecution’s investigations, explaining that his wife went to deliver her son to his teacher and then received a call from his sister She asks him about his beating his wife, but he denied it, but was then surprised by a call from the police station stating that his wife had filed a complaint against him.
The attorney of the accused, Lawyer Ramzi Al-Agouz, stated, during his pleading before the court, that the elements of the crime of threat were not available, because what the jurisprudence has settled on is that the direct verbal threat is not serious, except that it causes inconvenience to the same threatening person, in addition to the unreasonableness of the incident, the maliciousness of the accusation and its fabrication, and the absence of papers from Evidence only the statements of the wife that do not live up to the rank of evidence.
He pointed out that there is a contradiction in the complainant’s statements in the investigations of the Public Prosecution and the police, which confirms the incorrectness of the incident as depicted, explaining that his client tried to enter his house, but the complainant refused to open the door, which caused his nervousness due to the presence of previous disputes between them. He demanded the acquittal of his client of what was attributed to him because the papers were devoid of evidence to prove the validity of his perpetration of the incident.
The judgment stated that the accused held a sit-in in the investigations of the Public Prosecution and before the court by denying what the complainant attributed to him, and the accusation remained based on the statements of the conductor of the investigations, which are no more than an opinion of the conduct of the investigations and cannot be relied upon alone, as they are just a presumption and not evidence of the accusation being proven.
She added that the digital memory made by the complainant and the recording inside it did not contain what was clearly understood from it as an insult to the recipient or an explicit threat, so the accusation remained devoid of any evidence, so that the acquittal of the accused must be judged due to the insufficiency of the argument, and it ruled that the accused be acquitted of the charges against him .
Follow our latest local and sports news and the latest political and economic developments via Google news