A cup of tea reveals the theft of gas cylinders
Doha – East
The Criminal Court acquitted two people of stealing movables because the two conditions of conviction were not met, and the arrest and search procedures were invalid.
The facts indicate that the Public Prosecution accused two persons of having entered an inhabited place owned by a third party without the consent of its possessor with the intention of committing a crime, and if they were Muslims of the religion they stole the movables, the description and the value recorded in the lawsuit papers, and these stolen items are gas cylinders owned by a person.
The second accused obtained items in circumstances leading to the belief that their source was illegal, and the Public Prosecution requested that they be punished under Articles 1, 77, 323, 334, 340, and 367 of the Penal Code.
The victim stated in his testimony to the investigations that when he returned from the Fajr prayer, he asked his maid to make a cup of tea, and she told him that there was no gas, so he discovered that an unknown person had stolen 3 gas cylinders, the value of which was estimated at one thousand riyals, from inside his house. After searching and investigating, it was found that a car stopped in front of the victim’s house, and the data was recorded and moved to the place. Half an hour later, a report of the theft of gas cylinders was received, and the police then went to the place, and the owner of the vehicle was arrested.
The accused confessed to stealing gas cylinders alone from several homes.-
The incident officer testified that several reports of thefts were received from multiple homes in the regions, and that the perpetrator stole gas cylinders, after which the police conducted investigations and covered the place with surveillance, after which it was found that there was a car parked in front of the victim’s house, and the owner was arrested.--
The police formed a search team after several reports of house thefts were received by the police, then the areas were monitored and the thieves were tracked down, then the thief confessed to stealing and selling the records.
The second defendant admitted that he used to buy cylinders from the first defendant, as he bought 40 gas cylinders from him and displays and sells them through a website, then the customer buys the cylinder from the website without knowing the source of this goods.
It was stated in the ruling that the defense raised by the first accused invalidated the search and arrest and the invalidity of the subsequent procedures.
And in Articles 40, 41, and 42 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is not permissible to arrest or search any person except with a license or permission from the authorizing authority after there is sufficient evidence of the accusation or the availability of a state of flagrante delicto against him, and it was decided that the arrest procedure is invalid.
What is established from the papers is that the judicial police officer received news of the theft of 3 gas cylinders, so he moved to the place where the car was spotted and conducted a search and investigation. The defendants are invalid and their consequences are invalid, and the case is devoid of evidence that the court is satisfied with that the accused committed these crimes and the court acquits them.