A SUB-POSTMASTER stole more than £200,000 from his employers after being threatened by a member of his own community, a court heard today.

Ajmair Singh, 35, said he had received threats and feared for the safety of his family unless he handed over the cash.

Over a nine-month period he took cash totalling almost £218,000 from two post office branches that he ran in Middlesbrough and handed it over to Hamair Singh, who is not related.

Teesside Crown Court heard that Singh, a father of four, did not go to the police or tell other members of the Sikh community - instead, he just paid up.

Between December 2007 and September 2008 he took £207,206.52 from the Coulby Newham post office and £10,700 from High Clarence branch.

On one occasion the defendant handed over £60,000 to Hamair Singh and attempted to hide the missing cash by making false declarations.

However, the thefts were uncovered during an internal Post Office audit and Singh soon admitted he was responsible for the missing money.

The court heard Hamair Singh received threats over an unpaid debt and put pressure on Singh to give him money.

Paul Caulfield, prosecuting, said that during interviews with Post Office investigators Singh admitted what he had done but said he felt threatened by Hamair Singh.

''He was to say that he bitterly regretted his actions and he had not only ruined his reputation but his life,'' Mr Caulfield said.

Singh, of Gunnergate Lane, Marton, Middlesbrough admitted two charges of theft at an earlier hearing.

Brian Russell, defending, said Singh regretted not contacting the authorities or seeking help from the Sikh community when first contacted by Hamair Singh, who has since gone missing.

''It was not until much later that he discovered that other members of the community had suffered as well,'' Mr Russell said.

''It is clear he did not personally benefit from this money whatsoever.''

Since the thefts came to light the defendant, with the help of his family, had repaid £113,000 of the money he stole.

Judge Les Spittle said Singh's offending was unusual and adjourned sentencing for three months to allow an investigation under the Proceeds of Crime Act to take place.

The judge said a custodial sentence was inevitable. However, under the circumstances it could be suspended.

''This theft was not in order to fund a lavish lifestyle, to drive round in big cars or have a large house,'' he said.

''One normally finds that people stealing substantial amounts of money are doing so for their own benefit.

''You thought your family was under threat and over a period of time you handed over a substantial amount of money.''