Kuwaiti man acquitted in drug use, DUI after appeal

Arab Times

19-06-2025

KUWAIT CITY, June 19: The Court of Appeals overturned the two-year prison sentence imposed on a Kuwaiti citizen with a criminal record, and then acquitted him of drug use and driving under the influence due to invalid procedures. Earlier, the Public Prosecution charged the defendant with the possession of psychotropic substances for personal consumption, as he allegedly failed to prove that he obtained a permit to do so. He was found to be a repeat offender and was sentenced to three years and four months in prison with hard labor for another felony. He also drove under the influence of amphetamine -- a psychotropic substance -- despite being a repeat offender, as described in the charge sheet. Attorney Mohammad Jaber Baqer, the lawyer of the defendant, appeared before the Court of Appeals, where he argued that the search of his client was invalid because it was conducted outside the legally prescribed circumstances, and that the defendant had denied the incident from the beginning of the investigation. The court accepted the arguments of Baqer and based its ruling on the legality of the initial arrest and the limits of the subsequent search, which were intended to strip the arrested person of any weapons or tools that might aid him in escaping or harming himself or others under Article 51 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The court found that the search of a small box in the defendant's possession exceeded the limits; as such a box could not contain a weapon or a means of escape or harm. It then ruled that this search is invalid due to exceeding the legal purpose and the invalidity of the evidence derived from it. The court declared that all the narcotics seized from the defendant, which were purportedly inside the small box, are considered inconclusive. It added that such evidence cannot be used as basis for a conviction ruling as it was a direct result of an invalid procedure. It added that the case documents lacked any other legitimate evidence that could prove the first and second charges after excluding the invalid evidence.