Supreme Court of the Republic of Turkey
7. Criminal Chamber
Basis: 2014/3174
Decision: 2016/9031
Decision Date: 30.06.2016
CRIME OF OBJECTING THE LAW NUMBER 4733 – THE REGISTRATION OF THE VEHICLE USED IN THE CRIME IS INFORMED AND THE PROVISION IS ESTABLISHED BY INCOMPLETE EXAMINATION WITHOUT A DECLARATION ABOUT THE CONSIDERATION
SUMMARY: The establishment of a judgment as a result of incomplete examination necessitated reversal, without the registration owner of the vehicle used in the crime being informed of the case, without taking a statement about the confiscation and without discussing whether the vehicle belongs to a bona fide third person or not. It was decided to overturn the judgment.
Litigation and Decision: The judgment rendered by the local court is appealed; After the file was read according to the nature of the application, the type of punishment, its duration and the date of the crime, the necessity was discussed and considered on behalf of the Turkish Nation;
1- Except for the defendant … …’s claim that 5200 cartons of smuggled cigarettes, which were the subject of the crime, belonged to … and that he made an offer to be transported to the defendant … decision making,
2- Article 3/5 of the Law No. 5607 on the accused … …. 8/4 of the Law No. 4733, without being given the right of additional defense, although a public lawsuit was filed with the request to be punished in accordance with the article. Article 226/1 of the Criminal Procedure Code by establishing a sentence for opposition to the article. violation of Article
3- Registration owner of the vehicle used in the crime Criminal Procedure Code 257/2. A written verdict is made as a result of incomplete examination, without being informed of the case in accordance with the article, without taking a statement about the confiscation and without discussing whether the vehicle belongs to a bona fide third person or not,
4- Due to the cancellation of some parts of Article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code No. 5237 with the cancellation decision of the Constitutional Court dated 08.10.2015 and numbered 2014/140 and numbered 2015/85, which was published in the Official Gazette dated 24.11.2015 and numbered 29542, there is an obligation to re-evaluate the aforementioned article,
Pursuant to paragraph 3 of article 53 of the Turkish Penal Code numbered 5237, the defendant ……, who is written in subparagraph (c) of paragraph 1 of the same article, is subject to the custody rights over his/her descendants and to be released on probation from serving in a guardianship or trusteeship, this right regarding those other than his/her descendants. and making a written sentence without considering the necessity of deprivation of powers until the execution of the sentence is completed,
5- While the confiscation of the subject matter should be contented with, Article 8/4 of the Law No. 4733. It is also decided to liquidate it by destruction pursuant to the article,
6- It has been decided to accept the customs administration, which does not have the right to participate in the case, as a participant, and it is decided that “attorney fee in favor of the participating institution” in a way that cannot be understood in favor of which institution, although it has the title of participating in …
Conclusion: Since the objections of the defendants are unlawful and the objections of the defendants are deemed appropriate in this respect, the verdict is in Article 8/1 of the Law No. 5320. It was unanimously decided on 30.06.2016 that it be overturned pursuant to Article 321 of the Criminal Procedure Code No. 1412, which is in force in accordance with the article.
