Dubai: The Dubai court of appeal has upheld a one year jail term and deportation order against a man convicted of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl, ruling that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and dismissing the defence's bid to overturn the verdict or reduce the sentence.
The court accepted the man's appeal on procedural grounds but rejected it on merit, leaving the original judgment unchanged.
The man was convicted of taking advantage of the girl's young age to lie beside her on a bed under the same blanket, place his head on her chest and put his arm around her shoulder. The case was investigated by Al Qusais police station.
Get updated faster and for FREE: Download the Gulf News app now - simply click here.
The prosecution charged the defendant with sexually assaulting a minor under Articles 126(1) and 407(1–3) of Federal Decree-Law No. 31 of 2021 on Crimes and Penalties, as amended by Federal Decree-Law No. 36 of 2022.
Defence challenges verdict
The court of first instance sentenced the man to one year in prison, followed by deportation from the UAE. It also referred the civil claim to the competent civil court for separate consideration, with costs to be determined in accordance with the original ruling.
During a closed appeal hearing, the defendant denied the charges. His lawyer sought an acquittal, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to establish the elements of the offence or prove criminal intent.
As an alternative, the defence asked the court to reduce the sentence. The Public Prosecution opposed the appeal and called for the original verdict to be upheld.
Evidence supports conviction
After reviewing the case file, the Dubai court of appeal found that the court of first instance had properly assessed the evidence and based its verdict on sound legal grounds.
The evidence included statements made by the defendant during Public Prosecution investigations, statements given by the girl's parents to investigators, and forensic reports issued by the General Department of Forensic Science and Criminology.
The appeal court ruled that the evidence, considered as a whole, was sufficient to uphold the conviction. It rejected the defence's arguments that the elements of the offence had not been established, noting that these points had already been examined by the court of first instance
The judges found no errors in the court of first instance's reasoning or assessment of the evidence. They also concluded that the defence had presented no new evidence or legal grounds to justify overturning the conviction or reducing the sentence. The appeal court adopted the lower court's reasoning in support of its ruling.
The one-year prison sentence and deportation order remain in force, with deportation to follow completion of the sentence. The civil claim was referred to the competent civil court for separate consideration.