TC SUPREME
3.Criminal Department
Originally: 2017/6688
The Verdict: 2018/607
Decision Date: 22.01.2018
CRIME OF WOUNDING – THE NEED TO MOVE AWAY FROM THE LOWER LIMIT IF THE PARTICIPANT IS INJURED IN SUCH A WAY AS TO CAUSE BOTH A LIFE-THREATENING SITUATION AND BONE FRACTURES
SUMMARY: In the face of the fact that the defendant was injured as a result of an act of wounding that would endanger both his life and cause a bone fracture, it should be taken into account that this situation can only be a reason for moving away from the lower limit in determining the basic penalty, and the defendant will only be held responsible for an act of wounding in such a way as to endanger his life, which is the most severe consequence.
(5237 P. K. m. 53, 86, 87) (ANY. MAH. 08.10.2015 TE 2014/140 2015/85 K.)
An appeal is filed against the decision of the local court and the document is read;
It was discussed and deemed necessary;
Rejection of other objections that are not evaluated on the spot, but;
The fact that the defendant was injured as a result of an act of wounding that would endanger the participant’s life and cause a bone fracture, this situation can only cause him to move away from the lower limit in determining the basic penalty, the defendant will only be held responsible for an act of wounding in such a way as to endanger his life, which is the most severe consequence, upon application made in accordance with the last articles of the TCK 86/1, 87/1-d-87/3 of the TCK. without taking into account that the defendant will be held responsible for the act of wounding in accordance with the articles, the defendant should be given an additional penalty by increasing the penalty in accordance with the article Oct.,
Determination of the missing penalty by not applying the last articles of Articles 86/3-e and 87/1-e of the Turkish Commercial Code about the defendant, despite the fact that the defendant performed his action with a chair that was accepted to have come out of a gun, despite the fact that it was fixed by the doctor’s report and the defendant’s confession,
The Constitutional Court’s Article 53 of the TCC dated 24.11.2015 and numbered 2014/1401-2015/85 and numbered 5237, which entered into force through publication in the Official Gazette dated 08.10.2015 and numbered 29542. due to the annulment of some provisions of the article, it is necessary to re-evaluate the defendant’s legal status in terms of deprivation of rights,
Since the defendants’ appeals have been accepted on the spot as of this moment, for these reasons, the judgment is based on Article 33 of Law No. 6723. it is based on the substance. Amendment 8/1 of the Law No. 5320. 321 of the CMUK No. 1412, which is in force with the article. in accordance with Article 326 / last of the CMUK, it was decided unanimously on 22.01.2018 that the defendant’s right to acquittal requested in accordance with Article 326 / last of the CMUK should be reserved.