Nine months jail for Merry Hill post office thief (From Stourbridge News)

Nine months jail for Merry Hill post office thief

2:54pm Friday 6th November 2009

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Comments(0)

A MAN who stole more than £53,000 from a Merry Hill business run by his wife has been jailed for nine months.

Earlier today (Friday November 6), Wolverhampton Crown heard Salinder Singh, aged 45, took the cash to keep his struggling Dudley supermarket afloat.

Singh’s wife ran two post offices - one at the Brierley Hill shopping centre and another in City Road, Tividale.

When an audit was carried out at the City Road office there was a "clear shortfall" in the accounting system, said Richard Cole, prosecuting.

But Singh then produced from the retail side of the premises a bag containing £51,000 which officials suspected had been taken from the Merry Hill sub-post office.

When a check was carried out at Merry Hill it was discovered the £51,000 was missing from the safe and that staff had been asked to put the money aside by Mrs Surinder Kaur, the wife of Singh.

When questioned Mrs Kaur blamed her husband and stressed he was in charge of accounts for the City Road premises and he then admitted he had taken the money.

Simon Drew, defending Singh, who pleaded guilty to stealing £53,526, said the money had been repaid in full but "disastrously" the episode had resulted in Mrs Kaur losing her £45,000 a year job with the Post Office.

He told the court that Singh ran into financial difficulties after making the decision to take on a third business - the Bromley Supermarket - and that was why he took the money.

Mr Drew said: "Singh made a serious mistake - a business decision that was obviously wrong”, he added the family could now face having their home repossessed.

Judge Martin Walsh told Singh, a father of three of Kendal Road, Oldbury, "This was a large sum of money and a significant breach of trust."

Mrs Kaur of the same address denied theft at an earlier hearing and she was discharged when the prosecution offered no evidence in the case against her.

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Comments(0)