UAE: Expat convicted of conning man out of Dh20,000 now fighting deportation.

An Indian employee is fighting to overturn a deportation order after being convicted in a cybercrime and digital trading case. He was accused of scamming a victim out of nearly Dh20,000.

Seeking to clear his name and avoid deportation, he’s contesting the conviction before the Fujairah Appeal Court. The Fujairah Primary Court found him guilty of using Telegram to con an Arab national into sending money to two separate accounts.

In July, the victim reported to the police that someone contacted him via Telegram and convinced him to get into online trading. The victim transferred the amount to the account provided by the accused.

Upon investigation, the police discovered that one of the accounts belonged to the 26-year-old Indian defendant who was then arrested. He was charged with cybercrime, deception, and swindling a victim out of nearly Dh20,000.

During questioning, he denied the accusations and claimed that he was completing tasks as part of a job he found on Instagram. He said his role was to contact his employer’s clients and convince them to do online trading. The clients were then asked to transfer money to specific bank accounts against certain commission. He claimed that he was added to a WhatsApp group where he was instructed to provide his bank account details, which was then used to collect the money.

The accused was referred to the Fujairah Primary Court where he pleaded not guilty.

Lawyer Hani Hammouda Hagag argued that his client “had no criminal intent” and didn’t deceive the claimant. He pointed out that if the defendant had intended to defraud the victim, he would have used a false identity.

“Actually, the claimant waived his accusation against my client and dropped the case. He also admitted during interrogation that they both had been defrauded by others. The crime of swindling and deception requires criminal intent and motives, which my client lacked,” added Hagag.

Hagag further argued that the defendant only received the money “as part of his job and he transferred that money to his employers”. He also stated that the accused had not personally benefited from the funds. The lawyer submitted documents to the court to support his claim, and requested the judges to acquit his client.

“The evidence brought against my client are uncorroborated and unsubstantiated enough to convict the defendant,” said Hagag, who also provided the court with a copy of the victim’s waiver.

Despite this, the primary court found the defendant guilty, citing leniency, and ordered his deportation without imposing a prison sentence.