Sharjah Police arrest 144 beggars, confiscate Dhs76,000 in Ramadan
As part of their efforts to enhance community security and combat the phenomenon of begging, Sharjah Police revealed the results of 'Begging is a Crime and Giving is a Responsibility' campaign aimed to raise awareness, which involved illegal exploitation of public funds.
Brigadier General Omar Al Ghazal, Director of Special Tasks Department at Sharjah Police, praised the efforts of field teams, which resulted in the arrest of 144 male and female beggars during the Holy Month of Ramadan and the confiscation of over Dhs76,000 found in their possession.
Al Ghazal also appreciated the vital role of the public in reporting beggars and their co-operation with the security authorities to curb this phenomenon by calling 901 or 80040 and identifying their locations, which contributed to the success of the campaign and achieving its desired goals.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
3 days ago
- Gulf Today
Abu Dhabi court orders man to return Dhs400,000 to gym partner
Abu Dhabi Family, Civil and Administrative Cases Court ordered a person to return Dhs400,000 to another plus a 4 per cent interest from the date the lawsuit was filed until full payment. A settlement had been signed between the two parties under which the defendant was obligated to pay the amount in monthly installments but he had failed to comply. The two men were partners in a gym and the amount was equivalent to the price of the gym equipment that the defendant had received. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant in which he requested the court to obligate him to repay the outstanding amount of Dhs400,000 plus Dhs10,000 in compensation for all material and moral harms. He also requested the court to obligate the defendant to pay a 12 per cent legal interest from the date of the lawsuit until full payment plus the incurred legal fees, expenses and lawyer's fees. The plaintiff pleaded that he had loaned the defendant the claimed amount on the condition that he would repay it to him in equal installments according to an agreement drawn up between them, adding that the defendant failed to fulfill his obligations and refused to repay the debt. The plaintiff's attorney submitted a docket that included translated copies of the defendant's ID and passport, a settlement agreement, a notice of obligation to pay, email correspondence and a decision by the Alternative Dispute Resolution Department. The court explained that it is legally established that article 1/1 of the law of evidence in civil and commercial transactions stipulates that the plaintiff has the right to prove his claim and the defendant has the right to disprove it. Article 14 of the law of evidence stipulates that an admission is a statement by a party acknowledging a duty owed to another party, while article 15 outlines the conditions for a valid admission, requiring the person making it to have the capacity to dispose of the admitted right, the court said. Article 18 specifies that judicial admissions are conclusive and binding on the person making them, and they cannot be retracted, the court added. It is proven in the submitted documents and in the settlement signed between the two parties that the defendant borrowed Dhs400,000 from the plaintiff and pledged to repay it in 12 equal monthly installments of Dhs33,333.33 each, the court said. In the event of non-payment of any installment, the plaintiff has the right to resort to the court, it added. The defendant appeared before the court accompanied by an interpreter and acknowledged the settlement he had concluded with the plaintiff and decided that he was unable to pay the installments due to the gym being shut down, the court said. Since the defendant did not provide anything to prove payment of the amount and contented himself with saying that the settlement came in exchange for his receipt of gym equipment, the court obligated him to repay Dhs400,000.
Gulf Today
4 days ago
- Gulf Today
Gang jailed in Dubai for stealing Dhs9,900 from a man's account after forcing him to reveal bank details over phone
Dubai Misdemeanour and minor offences court sentenced a five-member Asian gang to one month in jail, to be followed by deportation, and fined them Dhs9,900 for defrauding an Arab national by impersonating a police officer and stealing funds from his bank account. The case dates back to March 2025, when the victim filed a report with Dubai Police, stating he had lost Dhs9,900 after receiving a call from one of the suspects claiming he was a police officer tasked by the Central Bank to update his bank account details. The gangster threatened the victim that his account would be frozen if the victim did not disclose his card details and PIN so the victim complied, only to discover the amounts were withdrawn moments later. Dubai Police's Cybercrime Unit found out that the gangsters used a residential apartment in Deira as a hub for targeting victims across the UAE. Investigations revealed that smart phones used to contact victims and commit crimes were found hidden in plastic bags and shoes. Forensic analysis affirmed one device was used in the victim's case. On being questioned, the gangsters admitted to impersonating police, bank, or government officials, tricking victims into revealing bank details. They confessed that they were recruited and directed by a fugitive who had rented the apartment for them before fleeing the country. They added that he used to contact them via phone, instructing them to collect victims' bank card details and PINs. Once the data was obtained, he used to withdraw money from the victims' accounts and send the gang members monthly payments ranging from Dhs1,800 to Dhs2,000.
Gulf Today
4 days ago
- Gulf Today
Showroom sells a used car for Dhs68,000, stalls payment to vehicle's owner
Al Ain Civil, Commercial and Administrative Cases Court obligated a showroom for selling new and used cars to return Dhs68,000 to a customer and fined it Dhs15,000 for failing to transfer the price of a car to a customer. Earlier, the customer asked the showroom to help him sell his car and consequently he was asked to transfer the ownership of the car to the showroom's name to make it easier to sell it. Later, an agreement on the sale price was reached, but the showroom did not commit to transferring the amount to the car owner and began to stall. The car owner filed a lawsuit against the showroom in which he requested the court to obligate it to pay him Dhs68,000 plus a legal interest at 9 per cent per annum from the date of the claim until full payment. He also requested the court to obligate the showroom to pay him Dhs30,000 in compensation for the material and moral harms he had befallen plus the incurred fees, expenses, and lawyer's fees. The car owner pleaded that he owned a car, and the defendant was a licensed showroom for selling new and used cars. As he wanted to sell his car, he agreed with the showroom for his car to be displayed at the showroom and then sold at the highest satisfactory price. The car continued to be displayed until the showroom informed the car owner that it had agreed with a buyer to sell the car for Dhs68,000, which the car owner agreed to. However, the showroom informed the car owner again that the buyer wanted to buy the car through a UAE bank and consequently the car owner was requested to transfer the ownership of the car to the showroom to be able to sell the car and complete the procedures faster. The showroom asked the car owner to use his digital ID and carry out the procedures for waiving the car and promised him to transfer the amount as soon as the procedures were completed. The car owner stated that the showroom, however, continued to stall on this matter and refused to transfer the amount to him although the car had already been sold and the sale price had already been received. This prompted the car owner to file a lawsuit, requesting the court to issue a verdict in his favour. He supported his lawsuit with a copy of the WhatsApp conversations and a copy of the car ownership document. The court explained that it was evident from the documents that the car owner had handed his car over to the showroom and declared that the showroom had sold it and collected its price Dhs68,000. The showroom did not dispute the origin of the debt and acknowledged the car owner's right to claim it. The court thereby ordered the showroom to pay the amount claimed and estimated the compensation due at Dhs15,000 for all the material and moral harms that the car owner had befallen.
