Bahrain
Kuwait
Oman
Middle East
GDN Online App available on
App Store / Play Store
Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News
Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News Gulf Daily News
Monday, July 23, 2018 ARCHIVES  |  SEARCH  |  POST ADS  |  ADVERTISE  |  SUBSCRIBE   |  LOGOUT   |  CONTACT US

Supermarket prices row five acquitted

Bahrain News
Wed, 06 Dec 2017
By Noor Zahra


A COURT has ruled that a second supermarket chain sold products at prices higher than advertised due to negligence.

Al Jazira Supermarket was previously ordered to close for 15 days after price discrepancies were uncovered at its Hamala branch, according to court documents.

A shopper highlighted the discrepancies on social media soon after the Ruyan Cold Store case came to light.

However, the High Criminal Court yesterday acquitted five people of the charges, saying they did not do it intentionally.

Five men, including one of the owners, previously denied overcharging customers.

“The supermarket chain did not mean to overcharge customers. The incident occurred due to negligence and was not done on purpose,” said the ruling.

“Some of the prices were different at the point-of-pay compared with prices written on the products.

“In some cases the prices were lower and in other cases the prices were higher.”

This was the second case in two months where the defendants were acquitted of overcharging their customers.

The GDN earlier reported that in a similar case all five outlets of Ruyan Cold Store were temporarily closed in January following an outcry on social media.

Six Indian men, a 42-year-old Bahraini who oversees all branches and a 41-year-old female heir, were found not guilty of deceiving customers through false advertising and manipulating prices.

The woman, the Bahraini male and two of the Indian defendants were found not guilty of allowing employees inside the Salmabad branch during the 15-day period when it was temporarily closed.

Court documents stated that many goods were found to actually be cheaper than what was originally displayed, meaning there was no intention of scamming customers.

The High Criminal Court on October 26 ruled that the price mix-up happened due to an error that showed the supplier’s prices for the goods rather than the store’s prices.

You Might Like