Dubai court deports, fines woman for abusing narcotics

The Dubai Court of Appeal has upheld the deportation penalty as an additional term to a prior ruling by a first of instance court, which had imposed a fine of Dhs5,000 on a young Arab woman.

The woman was found to have been under the influence of narcotics when she contacted the police and an ambulance to open the door to her home after experiencing severe illness and wanting to go to the hospital.

It was established that the convict had consumed narcotics, and as a result, she was referred to the jurisdiction of the Public Prosecution.

Subsequently, she was remanded to the Misdemeanor and Violation Court.

Specifically, the Dubai Police received a report from the convict, who stated that she was unable to open the door to her apartment and was in urgent need of medical attention.

Upon arrival at the scene, the rescue team and ambulance crew immediately entered the apartment and discovered the accused, aged 27, in a state of distress, devoid of the customary alcohol-related odour.

This aroused suspicion regarding the possibility of the accused having consumed other substances.

She was escorted to the local police station, where a sample was collected for forensic analysis.

A forensic laboratory report from Dubai Police revealed that the accused was under the influence of psychotropic substances. During the investigation, she admitted to taking crystal meth and stated that she was unaware of what happened next.

The results of the urine sample analysis conducted by the Toxicology Department of the General Department of Criminal Evidence and Criminology revealed the presence of two substances listed in Table No. 5 of the Anti-Narcotics Law, indicating crystal meth use.

During the trial, she admitted to having used crystal meth for the first time, emphasising that she had never previously been convicted of any drug offences.

The court ruled that the crime of using psychotropic substances is established by the intentional and conscious use of such substances, without the need for a specific purpose, as general criminal intent is sufficient.

The court was satisfied with the integrity of the arrest procedures, the proof that the accused had used narcotic substances, the forensic laboratory report confirming the presence of narcotic substances in the sample and the accused’s confession during the investigation.

The confession was consistent with the technical evidence and facts, and so the court convicted the accused and issued its aforementioned ruling.