The victim waived her rights and reached a settlement with the defendant, but the court ultimately rejected the case as lacking merit, and the original sentence was ultimately suspended. However, the defendant was ordered to pay the court costs.
If the same matter comes before the court again within three years of a suspended sentence, the defendant must serve the original sentence.
The incident began when the victim, a 40-year-old Arab man, learned that three of his sheep were being sold at a livestock market and reported the theft. He provided details of the suspect’s car to the store owner. Investigation revealed that the defendant had a similar criminal history.
The plaintiff claimed to have lost 30 sheep worth AED 50,000, but he only reported the theft after discovering three sheep were missing, making it impossible to prove such a significant loss. I couldn’t.
The defense argued that a loss of this magnitude required immediate reporting and showed the claims lacked credibility. Additionally, witnesses had seen workers feeding sheep during the day, raising suspicions that the theft had occurred in front of them.
Additionally, the plaintiff’s brother claimed to have seen two of the stolen sheep at the market and questioned how the plaintiff was able to identify them among so many others. This reportedly weakened the basis for the theft charge.