Expat sentenced to jail for stealing money from his employer
A Doha Criminal Court has sentenced an Arab expatriate, who worked as a public relations officer (mandoob) in a private firm, to three years in jail for stealing QR300,000 that belonged to his employer.
The court also ordered his deportation when the sentence expires.
According to Gulf Times, the local Arabic daily Arrayah reports the details of the case as the company had given the defendant a sum of QR300,000, which was to be delivered to the accounts head for payment to another firm.
The money was given in an envelope and the defendant had to sign to confirm that he had received the sum. He would regularly perform this task in the company.
However, the other company called up after two days, saying it was yet to receive the payment. When confronted by officials of his firm, the defendant denied receiving the sum and claimed that he put the envelope among other papers in his car and was not aware it contained money.
Further, he claimed that someone might have taken the envelope from his car or it got lost.
Eventually, the court convicted him based on the investigation and the evidence and documents of the case.
Somebody else may be involved ................
both side have big practical mistake.
01- according to the article, the company transecting the money to other company in regular manner. so, why they don't follow secure ways to handle such big value ?? there are many safe ways in Qatar such as bank, western union, telegram, registered money transfer etc etc!!!.
for example, incase if the car occurred with fatal crash when he go to other company or catches fire with some unexpected reasons, or someone notice the usual practice and may trap him into this case... now what the company can do.?? SO, THE COMPANY FAILED TO FOLLOW THE EASY AND SECURE / SAFE WAYS FOR MONEY HADLING.
**again. according to the article, the company would regularly perform to transfer. it means, the company didn't want to use the bank as they didn't like to show the income to the government. is it?
02- after the employee signed on a document, he is fully responsible to handover to other party and he should get the signature on the receiving copy. he has right to check the parcel infront of the first person before he sign on the reliever document.
All very strange.
He signed for the money, so must have been aware of the envelope contents.
Yet the article doesn't say whether the money was recovered or not
How on earth would a company transact with huge CASH in this civilized world? Are there no any other means of transacting? That's rather absurd. The poor guy was tempted.
It's a clear mistake ..............