Participation In Theft Crime
T.C.
Supreme Court
2nd Criminal Chamber
Esas No: 2014/577
Decision No: 2014/5739
K. Date:
According to the content of the file and the occurrence, the items stolen from the house of the complainant were seized in the vehicle driven by the defendant Erkan upon a report made half an hour later on the same day, and in the face of the defendant’s evasive persuasion regarding the occurrence; considering that the defendant Erkan directly participated in the crime, instead of punishing the defendant Erkan in accordance with Article 37/1 of the Turkish Penal Code, a reduction was made for the defendant Erkan in accordance with Article 39 of the same Law, which could not be applied in the concrete case,
In the event that the defendants Serdar Fidan, Ümit Çiçek and Recep Bilekçier broke the lock of the entrance door of the apartment of the participants and entered the house of the defendants Serdar and Ümit, and the defendant Recep stayed in the vehicle and acted as a lookout; Considering that the defendant Recep is the main perpetrator in terms of all crimes, it should be decided to punish him in accordance with Article 37/1 of the Turkish Penal Code for the crimes of violating the inviolability of housing and damaging property. While it should be decided that the defendant Recep should be sentenced in accordance with Article 37/1 of the TCC, the defendant who was sentenced with Article 37/1 of the TCC for the crime of theft was sentenced with Article 39 of the same law for the crimes of violating the inviolability of housing and damaging property,
According to the occurrence and file content, considering that the defendant A. O. directly participated in the crime by acting as a lookout in cooperation with the other defendant, instead of punishing the defendant in accordance with Article 37/1 of the Turkish Penal Code, sentencing the defendant in accordance with Article 39 of the same Law, which is not possible to be applied in the concrete case, required a reversal.