UAE Court Acquits Man in Alleged Forgery and Immigration Case

UAE court has acquitted an individual of all charges in a forgery and immigration-related case, ruling that the prosecution failed to meet the required standard of proof to establish criminal liability in the matter.

The litigation, led by UAE-based legal consultancy Kaden Boriss, involved allegations that the accused had participated in the forgery of official government stamps and used allegedly falsified documents in support of a residence visa application for his spouse. The case arose after a marriage certificate submitted to immigration authorities was flagged due to irregularities in the attestation stamps appearing on the document.

Authorities alleged that the accused had knowingly relied on a document bearing forged attestations and had conspired with a third party to facilitate the falsification of official stamps and seals. The case carried significant legal implications, including exposure to severe penalties under applicable laws given the nature of the accusations.

The defence team at Kaden Boriss argued from the outset that the accused had no involvement in any act of forgery and had acted in good faith throughout. It was submitted that he had shared an unattested marriage certificate with a third party solely for completing routine documentation formalities, without any knowledge or intention that the document would be altered or improperly attested.

A detailed review of the case file was conducted by the defence team, including examination of investigation records, witness statements and document verification findings. It was argued that the prosecution case was largely based on assumptions and circumstantial elements rather than direct, concrete or conclusive proof of wrongdoing.

The defence further submitted that there was no direct evidence linking the accused to any act of forgery, no proof of knowledge or intent regarding the alleged falsification, and no legal basis to attribute the independent actions of a third party to him. It was also argued that the essential elements required to establish criminal liability under law had not been satisfied in the case.

It was further emphasised that mere submission or possession of a document later found to be irregular does not, in itself, establish culpability unless supported by clear evidence of intentional participation or wrongdoing.

After examining the evidence and legal submissions, the court held that the material on record did not meet the threshold required to sustain the allegations. It observed that the case was surrounded by doubt and lacked the degree of certainty necessary for a conviction.

Reaffirming the fundamental legal principle that benefit of doubt must be given to the accused, the court concluded that the charges could not be upheld.

The court accordingly acquitted the accused of all allegations, while ordering confiscation of the disputed documents involved in the case.

The ruling underscores the importance of a robust legal defence in cases involving documentation processed through third parties, where individuals may unknowingly be exposed to legal risk without direct involvement in alleged wrongdoing.

For any enquiries or information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call us on +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.