T.C.
SUPREME
- CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
E. 2016/1417
K. 2017/6429
T. 19.9.2017
- INDICATES THAT THERE IS A PROHIBITION OF OVERTAKING DESPITE THE STRAIGHT LANE LINE AND THE PROHIBITION OF OVERTAKING SIGN, CAUSING AN ACCIDENT BY OVERTAKING THE VEHICLE IN FRONT OF IT (Acknowledging that the Defendant Committed His Act with Conscious Consideration and About TCK. Md. While a Provision Should be Established by Applying 22/3, By Accepting that the Act Was Committed in a Simple Manner and That It was a Criminal Error)
- TAXI KILLING (Indicates That Overtaking is Prohibited Despite the Straight Lane Line and the Overtaking Prohibition Sign, The Witness Statements That He Caused the Accident by Overtaking the Vehicle in Front of Him, As Well as the Admission that the Defendant Committed His Act with Conscious Taxi, which Is Fixed from the Entire Scope of the File, and About the TCC. Md. While a Provision Should be Established by Applying 22/3, By Accepting That the Act Was Committed in a Simple Manner and by Making a Mistake of a Criminal Nature, the Incomplete Determination of Punishment against the Defendant is Not Accurate)
- CONSCIOUS TAXI (Indicates a Ban on Overtaking Despite a Straight Lane and a Prohibition of Overtaking Sign, Witness Statements That He Caused an Accident by Overtaking the Vehicle In Front of Him, As Well as the Defendant’s Action, Which Is Fixed from the Entire Scope of the File, are Accepted that He Committed His Act with Conscious Taxi and About the TCC. Md. While a Provision Should be Established by Applying 22/3, By Accepting That the Act Was Committed in a Simple Manner and by Making a Mistake of a Criminal Nature, the Incomplete Determination of Punishment against the Defendant is Not Accurate)
5237/m.22/3,62 summary : despite signs and overtaking overtaking flat ribbon line indicates that, with respect to overtake the vehicle in front all the witness statements that the cause of the accident was the defendant’s action with file scope, which is fixed by conscious about the adoption of the Penal Code committed taksir 22/3. while a provision should be established by applying the article, incomplete determination of punishment against the accused is incorrect by recognizing that the act was committed in simple installments and by making a mistake of a criminal nature.
CASE : The verdict on the conviction of the defendant for the crime of murder by taxi was appealed by the defendant’s defense and the deputy of those involved, and the file was examined and considered as necessary:
DECISION: According to the trial conducted, the evidence collected and shown at the place of decision, the opinion and discretion of the court formed in accordance with the results of the prosecution, the scope of the file examined, the defendant’s defense was not fixed on the defendant, the crime was incomplete, the defect was examined, the amount of punishment, the amount of punishment for the participants, the amount of punishment, the defendant’s TCC 62. refusal of appeals on non-application of the article and long-term receipt of a driver’s license,
But;
16.10.2013 at 18.20 on the defendant outside the settlement of the driver with in the administration tool, 7 feet wide, in the absence of illumination, two-way bends, no slope and dry, while cruising on asphalt road in the opposite direction in the administration of the Strip entering the front of the car with the driver in the front of the bus we are cruising portions administration and other parts in the vehicle as a result of the shock to their death, and in the event of resulting in injury to more than one person; overtaking overtaking signs and flat ribbon line indicates that, despite the cause of the accident with respect to overtake the vehicle in front all the file scope, which is fixed by the defendant’s action was with witness statements about the adoption of the Penal Code, committed with conscious Taksir of 22/3. while a provision should be established by applying the article, incomplete determination of punishment against the accused by recognizing that the act was committed in simple installments and by making a delusion of a criminal nature,
CONCLUSION: Since it is contrary to the law and the appeals of the participants’ deputies are considered to be in place as of this moment, the provision of Law No. 5320 No. 8 for these reasons. article 321 of CMUK No. 1412, which is currently being implemented in accordance with Article. according to the article, it was unanimously decided on 19.09.2017 that the request be overturned in accordance with.