T.C. SUPREME COURT

3.Criminal Department
Base: 2015/32248
Decision: 2016/15322
Date of Decision: 30.06.2016

SIMPLE INJURY OFFENSE – A REPORT ISSUED BY THE REGIONAL EDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH HOSPITAL, WHICH CONFIRMS THE DEFENDANT’S STATEMENT – THE IMPOSSIBILITY OF DISCUSSING AT THE PLACE OF THE DECISION WHETHER TO APPLY THE PROVISIONS OF UNFAIR INCITEMENT – VIOLATION OF THE PROVISION

SUMMARY: The defendant’s statement received at the investigation stage confirms this statement with his wife’s statement that he hit her with a chair and wrist … In the face of the report dated 09/10/2014 organized by the Regional Educational and Research Hospital, the TCC’s 29th decision on the defendant. the fact that the decision on whether to apply the unfair driving provisions set out in the article should not be discussed on the spot required a reversal.

(5237 P. K. m. 29, 53) (ANY. MAH. 08.10.2015 T. E. 2014/140 2015/85 K.)

Case and Decision: The decision given by the local court is appealed and the documents are read;

It was discussed and considered as necessary;

1) In the examination of appeals against the conviction of the defendant for the simple offense of intentionally wounding his mother-in-law …;

The decision of the Constitutional Court dated 24.11.2015 and entered into force by publication in the Official Gazette No. 29542 dated 08.10.2015 and No. 2014/1401-2015/85 and No. 53 of the Turkish Commercial Code No. 5237. although some of the phrases in the article have been canceled, the reason for the violation has not been made, since this issue can be taken into account at the execution stage.

According to the trial, the evidence collected and disclosed at the place of decision, the court’s belief and discretion formed as a result of the prosecution, the justification shown and the practice, the defendant’s appeals that are not considered on the spot are rejected and the decision is upheld in accordance with the request,

2) In the examination of appeals against the conviction of the defendant for the simple offense of intentionally wounding his wife …;

Rejection of other objections that are not seen on the spot; but;

a) The defendant’s statement received at the investigation stage confirms this statement with the statement that his wife hit him with a chair and wrist … In the face of the report dated 09/10/2014 organized by the Regional Educational and Research Hospital, the 29th Amendment of the TCC about the defendant. the decision on whether to apply the provisions of unfair driving regulated in the article should not be discussed on the spot,

b) The decision of the Constitutional Court dated 24.11.2015 and entered into force by publication in the Official Gazette No. 29542 dated 08.10.2015 and decision No. 2014/1401- 2015/85 and Article 53 of the TCC No. 5237. 53 of the TCC No. 5237 due to the cancellation of some phrases in its article. there is an obligation to re-evaluate the defendant’s legal status in terms of the deprivation of rights specified in the article,

Since the appeals of the accused were considered in place as of this moment, the decision was therefore made in accordance with Article 8/1 of Law No. 5320. article 321 of CMUK No. 1412, which is in force with Article. according to the article, it was unanimously decided on 30/06/2016 that the request would be OVERTURNED.