Crime Of Mistreatment – Supreme Court Decision On The Crime Of Mistreatment Attributed To The Defendant
CRIME OF ABUSE – ABUSE CHARGED AGAINST THE DEFENDANT
CRIME COMMITTED – UNLAWFUL AND UNJUSTIFIED
ACQUITTAL DECISION – REVERSAL OF THE JUDGMENT
SUMMARY: After bringing a mistress into the home he shared with the complainant, who was his wife, the defendant mistreated the complainant, causing her psychological distress and leading her to attempt suicide. The defendant’s act of bringing a mistress into the home, and his bad behavior and attitude as a whole were incompatible with feelings of love and compassion, caused mental harm to the complainant, and constituted mistreatment that reached a level that would cause emotional distress to the victim. Therefore, the acquittal decision was rendered without considering that the defendant had committed the crime of mistreatment,
and this constitutes grounds for reversal.
(5237 S. K. m. 232)
Case and Decision: The rulings issued by the Local Court were appealed, and the case was reviewed based on the appeal period, the nature of the decision, and the date of the crime:
Since there were no grounds for rejecting the appeal, the case proceeded to the merits.
Based on the minutes, documents, and reasoning reflecting the trial process during which the court formed its conviction, no other grounds were found to be valid.
However, Article 232 of the Turkish Penal Code regulates and punishes acts that cause physical or mental harm to victims committed by perpetrators against persons with whom they live in the same residence,
other than acts such as assault, threat, or verbal abuse that are explicitly regulated as crimes in other articles of the Law.
The article does not specify which actions constitute “cruel treatment,” but the legislature defines this concept in the article’s rationale as follows: “Not every form of cruel treatment constitutes a crime;
must be of a nature incompatible with mercy, compassion, and kindness.”….. and …. actions that are incompatible with these feelings and cause physical or mental harm to the victim must be considered mistreatment.
In the present case, after the defendant brought his concubine into the home he shared with the complainant, who was his wife, he mistreated the complainant, causing her psychological distress and leading her to attempt suicide. The defendant’s act of bringing his concubine into the home, and his display of abusive behavior and attitude constitute mistreatment that is incompatible with feelings of love and compassion, causes mental harm to the complainant, and reaches a level that causes emotional distress in the victim. Therefore, the crime of mistreatment attributed to the defendant
has been established. However, the acquittal decision was made based on an unlawful and unfounded justification without considering this.
is contrary to the law, and since the grounds for appeal by the Public Prosecutor of that court are deemed valid, it was decided by unanimous vote on February 13, 2017,
to overturn the ruling in accordance with the notification, to send the file to the court of first instance to be continued and concluded from the stage prior to the overturning,