{"id":2041,"date":"2016-07-05T23:14:40","date_gmt":"2016-07-05T20:14:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/?p=2041"},"modified":"2025-10-10T21:37:59","modified_gmt":"2025-10-10T18:37:59","slug":"hukum-asamasinda-hazir-bulunmayan-sanik-temyiz-suresi-iddianamenin-saniga-teblig-edilmemesi-iddia-makaminin-mutalaasinin-yuze-karsi-okunmamasi-saniklarin-baska-suctan-tutuklu-kaldigidurusmadan-ba","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tuncayilcim.av.tr\/v5\/hukum-asamasinda-hazir-bulunmayan-sanik-temyiz-suresi-iddianamenin-saniga-teblig-edilmemesi-iddia-makaminin-mutalaasinin-yuze-karsi-okunmamasi-saniklarin-baska-suctan-tutuklu-kaldigidurusmadan-ba\/","title":{"rendered":"Y\u00dcZE KAR\u015eI OKUNMAYAN CEZA ; Savc\u0131l\u0131k M\u00fctalaas\u0131\/Esas Hakk\u0131nda Savunma\/SANI\u011eA SON S\u00d6Z\u00dcN\u00dcN SORULMASI GERE\u011e\u0130-SEGB\u0130S Y\u00f6ntemi \u0130le Savunma Al\u0131nmas\u0131"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

San\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z verildikten sonra mahkeme duru\u015fman\u0131n bitti\u011fini bildirir ve h\u00fckm\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klar. H\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131 herkes taraf\u0131ndan ayakta dinlenir. (CMK\/231-4)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

H\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131 okunarak gerek\u00e7esi ana \u00e7izgileriyle anlat\u0131l\u0131r. (CMK\/231-1)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurabilece\u011fi kanun yollar\u0131, mercii ve s\u00fcresi bildirilir. (CMK\/231-2)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Beraat eden san\u0131\u011fa, tazminat isteyebilece\u011fi bir h\u00e2l varsa bu da bildirilir. (CMK\/231-3)<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn gerek\u00e7esini daha sonra gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klayabilir. Bu nedenle son duru\u015fmada verilen karara \u201ck\u0131sa karar\u201d denilir. Daha sonra tebli\u011f edilen karara ise \u201cgerek\u00e7eli karar\u201d denilir.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Mahkemeler \u00e7o\u011funlukla gerek\u00e7eyi duru\u015fmada a\u00e7\u0131klamamakta, gerek\u00e7eli kararlar\u0131 daha sonra yazmaktad\u0131rlar. H\u00fck\u00fcmde gerek\u00e7e a\u00e7\u0131klanmam\u0131\u015fsa, h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131ndan itibaren en ge\u00e7 onbe\u015f g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde gerek\u00e7eli karar yaz\u0131l\u0131r.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\u00a0T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2012\/6-1442<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2013\/451<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 12.11.2013<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

DAVA : <\/b>Ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 149\/1-a, 35\/2, 150\/2, 53, 54 ve 63. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 1 y\u0131l 3 ay hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, hak yoksunlu\u011funa, m\u00fcsadereye ve mahsuba ili\u015fkin, Ankara 4. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 19.4.2007 g\u00fcn ve 95-145 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 6. Ceza Dairesince 15.2.2012 g\u00fcn ve 17458-2248 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

\n

“16.2.2007 tarihli oturumda ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu bulundu\u011fu Yozgat Cezaevinden getirilerek savunmas\u0131n\u0131n saptand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu san\u0131k son oturumda\u00a0haz\u0131r bulundurulmadan yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131l\u0131p h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne karar verilmek suretiyle C.M.K.196. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131” sebebiyle BOZULMASINA karar\u00a0verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise 3.4.2012 g\u00fcn ve 131262 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

“C.M.K.nun 196. maddesinin 5. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda; ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan, yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir cezaevinde tutuklu olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131\u00a0son oturumda haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131 zorunlu de\u011fildir. Bu sebeple mahkemenin san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yoklu\u011funda kovu\u015fturmay\u0131 bitirmesi ve mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc kurmas\u0131nda isabetsizlik bulunmamaktad\u0131r”<\/span><\/strong> d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle itiraz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurarak, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve dosyan\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn esastan incelenmesi amac\u0131yla \u00d6zel Daireye g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmesi isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

C.M.K.nun 308\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapan \u00d6zel Dairece 12.10.2012 g\u00fcn ve 16889-18242 say\u0131yla itiraz nedenlerinin yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bahisle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

T\u00dcRK M\u0130LLET\u0130 ADINA<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURUL KARARI<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilen somut olayda, \u00d6zel Daireyle Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda h\u00fckmen tutuklu bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi son oturuma getirilmeden karar verilmesinin savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

Ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten yarg\u0131lanmakta olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun istinabe suretiyle yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7lamay\u0131 kabul etmedi\u011fini ve duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmak istedi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi, yerel mahkemece yarg\u0131lamaya konu ya\u011fma su\u00e7unun yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131n be\u015f y\u0131ldan fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmesi ve istinabe yasa\u011f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 sebebiyle yeniden sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ancak kendisine ve a\u00e7\u0131k adresine ula\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu sebeple hakk\u0131nda yakalama karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi, ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7tan mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tutuklu bulundu\u011fu tespit edilen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n cezaevinden getirtilip zorunlu m\u00fcdafii huzurunda savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nd\u0131ktan sonra hakk\u0131ndaki yakalama karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edilece\u011fi oturumda haz\u0131r bulunmak istedi\u011fine dair bir beyanda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, m\u00fcdafiinin haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu bir sonraki celsede ayn\u0131 su\u00e7tan mahkumiyetine karar verildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\n

San\u0131k haz\u0131r bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n duru\u015fma yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 kural\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun “san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmamas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 193. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131; “Kanunun ayr\u0131k tuttu\u011fu haller sakl\u0131 kalmak \u00fczere haz\u0131r bulunmayan san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmaz. Gelmemesinin ge\u00e7erli nedeni olmayan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n zorla getirilmesine karar verilir’ h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc amir olup, bu kural\u0131n istisnalar\u0131 ayn\u0131 maddenin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “San\u0131k hakk\u0131nda, toplanan delillere g\u00f6re mahkumiyet d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi kan\u0131s\u0131na var\u0131l\u0131rsa, sorgusu yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olsa da dava yoklu\u011funda bitirilebilir’,<\/p>\n

194. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “San\u0131k savu\u015fur veya ara vermeyi izleyen oturuma gelmezse \u00f6nceden sorguya \u00e7ekilmi\u015f ve art\u0131k haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131na mahkemece gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmezse dava yoklu\u011funda bitirilebilir’,<\/p>\n

195. maddesinde; “Su\u00e7, yaln\u0131z veya birlikte adli para cezas\u0131n\u0131 veya m\u00fcsadereyi gerektirmekte ise san\u0131k gelmese bile duru\u015fma yap\u0131labilir. Bu gibi hallerde san\u0131\u011fa g\u00f6nderilecek davetiyede gelmese de duru\u015fman\u0131n yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131r,<\/p>\n

200. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “San\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcz\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 su\u00e7 ortaklar\u0131ndan birinin veya bir tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemeyece\u011finden endi\u015fe edilirse, mahkeme, sorgu ve dinleme s\u0131ras\u0131nda o san\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkeme salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verebilir,<\/p>\n

204. maddesinde; “Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 sebebiyle haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n duru\u015fman\u0131n d\u00fczenli olarak y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesini tehlikeye sokaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda san\u0131k, duru\u015fma salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131r. Mahkeme san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131 dosyan\u0131n durumuna g\u00f6re savunmas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan zorunlu g\u00f6rmezse, oturumu yoklu\u011funda s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fcr ve bitirir. Ancak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fcdafii yoksa, mahkeme barodan bir m\u00fcdafi g\u00f6revlendirilmesini ister. Oturuma yeniden al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar verilen san\u0131\u011fa yoklu\u011funda yap\u0131lan i\u015flemler a\u00e7\u0131klan\u0131r \u015feklinde g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Ayn\u0131 kanunun uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusunun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcne \u0131\u015f\u0131k tutan “san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmadan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 196. maddesi ise;<\/p>\n

“1) Mahkemece sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan san\u0131k veya bu hususta san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde m\u00fcdafii isterse, mahkeme san\u0131\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmaktan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutabilir.<\/p>\n

2-) San\u0131k, alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131l ve daha fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7lar hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere, istinabe suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilebilir. Sorgu i\u00e7in belirlenen g\u00fcn, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131yla san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiine bildirilir. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131yla m\u00fcdafiin sorgu s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 zorunlu de\u011fildir. Sorgusundan \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa, ifadesini esas mahkemesi huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011fi sorulur.<\/p>\n

3-) Sorgu tutana\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada okunur.<\/p>\n

4-) Yukar\u0131daki f\u0131kralar i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ayn\u0131 anda g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc ve sesli ileti\u015fim tekni\u011finin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle sorgusunun yap\u0131labilmesi olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde bu y\u00f6ntem uygulanarak sorgu yap\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n

5-) Hastal\u0131k veya disiplin \u00f6nlemi ya da zorunlu di\u011fer sebeplerle yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir hastahane veya tutukevine nakledilmi\u015f olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak ko\u015fuluyla, haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131na gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen oturumlar i\u00e7in getirilmemesine mahkemece karar verilebilir.<\/p>\n

6-) Yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, belirlenen duru\u015fma tarihinde haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n zorlu\u011fu halinde, bu tarihten \u00f6nce duru\u015fma a\u00e7\u0131larak veya istinabe suretiyle sorgusu yap\u0131labilir bi\u00e7iminde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Maddenin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda, mahkemece sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak \u015fart\u0131yla san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ya da bu hususta san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde m\u00fcdafiinin istemiyle duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmaktan vareste tutulabilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015f, 5. f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise hastal\u0131k veya disiplin \u00f6nlemi ya da zorunlu di\u011fer sebeplerle yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki hastane veya tutukevine nakledilmi\u015f olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, daha \u00f6nce sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak \u015fart\u0131yla haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131na gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen oturumlar i\u00e7in getirilmemesi hususunda mahkemece bir karar verilebilece\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Maddenin her iki f\u0131kras\u0131nda da san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 hali duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulman\u0131n \u015fart\u0131 olarak belirtilmi\u015f, ancak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun ne \u015fekilde yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 hususunda herhangi bir a\u00e7\u0131klamaya yer ve<\/b>rilmemi\u015f olup, bu konu maddenin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Bu d\u00fczenlemeye g\u00f6re, alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131ldan az hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7tan yarg\u0131lanmakta olan san\u0131\u011fa, sorgusundan \u00f6nce ifadesini esas mahkemesi huzurunda ve<\/b>rmek isteyip istemedi\u011fi sorulduktan son<\/b>ra istinabe suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilebilecektir. Alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131l ve daha fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7lardan dolay\u0131 ise san\u0131klar\u0131n sorgusunun mutlaka yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkemece yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Sorgusundan \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa, ifadesini yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkeme huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011finin sorulmamas\u0131 veya sorulmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmak istemedi\u011fini belirten san\u0131\u011f\u0131n istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesiyle yetinilmesi, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131ndan mutlak bozma nedenidir.<\/span><\/h5>\n<\/blockquote>\n

C.M.K.nun 196. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k d\u00fczenlemesinden anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, kanun koyucu, sorgunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda san\u0131klar\u0131n tutuklu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda herhangi bir ay\u0131r\u0131ma yer vermeyerek, yaln\u0131zca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 su\u00e7 i\u00e7in kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen cezan\u0131n alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131 esas alan ilkeyi benimsemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131, y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck y\u00f6n\u00fc bulunmakla birlikte \u00f6ncelikle kendisi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bir hak olup, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n temel unsurlar\u0131ndan birisini de te\u015fkil etmektedir. Taraf\u0131 oldu\u011fumuz ve onaylamakla i\u00e7 hukuk mevzuat\u0131m\u0131za dahil etti\u011fimiz Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin “Adil Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 6. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (c) bendinde; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en az\u0131ndan kendi kendisini savunmak hakk\u0131 bulundu\u011fu belirtilmekle, mahkeme huzurunda do\u011frudan savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapabilmesi i\u00e7in duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r olma hakk\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 da z\u0131mnen kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Kendisi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hak olarak d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi kabul edilen bir hususta san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu hakk\u0131 ne \u015fekilde kullanaca\u011f\u0131 konusunda hi\u00e7bir insiyatiflnin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc halinde hakk\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan da s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n

Duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 san\u0131ktan kaynaklanan bir olumsuzluk olmaks\u0131z\u0131n onun istemi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ortadan kald\u0131ran ve zorunlu varesteli\u011fi \u00f6ng\u00f6ren 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.U.K.nun 226. maddesinin 4. f\u0131kras\u0131nda yer alan; “duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmese bile, davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc yer mahkemesinin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7tan tutuklu veya cezas\u0131 infaz edilmekte olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu bulundu\u011fu yerdeki mahkeme arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla yapt\u0131r\u0131labilir \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenlemeye 1.6.2005 g\u00fcn\u00fc y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nda yer verilmeyerek, hem adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n temel unsurlar\u0131ndan birini olu\u015fturan duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rlayan bir uygulamaya son verilmi\u015f, hem de \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 halinde san\u0131\u011fa sorgusunu istinabe yoluyla yapma imkan\u0131 verilmek suretiyle, \u00f6ncelikle san\u0131k y\u00f6n\u00fcnden bir hak olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olan duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma halinin san\u0131k i\u00e7in k\u00fclfet olu\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n da \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Nitekim Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesi’nin 12.2.1985 tarihli Colozza ve Rubinat\/\u0130talya ve 25.11.1997 tarihli Zana \/T\u00fcrkiye kararlar\u0131nda; “S\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle garanti alt\u0131na al\u0131nan bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131ndan vazge\u00e7ilmesi bunun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a s\u00f6ylenmesiyle m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilir4′ denilmek suretiyle, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131ndan feragat etmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu bilgiler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

Ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten yarg\u0131lanmakta olan ve davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan h\u00fckmen tutuklu bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 mahkemece usul\u00fcne uygun olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi ve duru\u015fmada vareste tutulmak istedi\u011fini beyan eden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edilece\u011fi celsede haz\u0131r bulunmak istedi\u011fine dair beyanda bulunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, m\u00fcdafiinin haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu oturuma getirtilmeden karar verilmesi savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

Bu nedenle, yerel mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7tan mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tutuklu olan san\u0131k haz\u0131r bulundurulmadan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle BOZULMASINA dair \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131 isabetsizdir. Bu itibarla, itiraz\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na veh\u00fckm\u00fcn esastan incelenebilmesi amac\u0131yla dosyan\u0131n \u00d6zel Daireye g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

\u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan on Genel Kurul \u00dcyesi; “Ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7 sebebiyle mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tutuklu bulunan san\u0131k haz\u0131r bulundurulmadan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu, bu sebeple itiraz\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle kar\u015f\u0131 oy kullanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7 : A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

1-) Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne,<\/p>\n

2-) Yarg\u0131tay 6. Ceza Dairesinin 15.2.2012 g\u00fcn ve 17458-2248 Say\u0131l\u0131 bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na,<\/p>\n

3-) Dosyan\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenebilmesi amac\u0131yla Yarg\u0131tay 6. Ceza Dairesine g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na tevdiine, 12.11.2013 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar ve<\/b>rildi.<\/p>\n

T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2013\/14-215<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2014\/547<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 9.12.2014<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

DAVA : <\/b>Kasten yaralama cinsel sald\u0131r\u0131 ve hakaret su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan san\u0131k H. izmirli’nin beraat\u0131na ili\u015fkin, izmir 18. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 12.6.2007 g\u00fcn ve 151-372 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn m\u00fc\u015fteki taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 14. Ceza Dairesince 1.2.2012 g\u00fcn ve 4182-602 ile;<\/p>\n

“M\u00fc\u015ftekinin soru\u015fturma safhas\u0131ndaki kolluk ifadesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 adresinin 4200. sokak no:44 Karaba\u011flar\/izmir oldu\u011fu, an\u0131lan adrese mahkemece \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lan tebligat\u0131n bila tebli\u011f iade edilmesi \u00fczerine. 12.6.2007 tarihli ilk duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lamayan m\u00fc\u015ftekinin, mahkemece ilk celse verilen beraat h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc haricen \u00f6\u011frenip ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn verdi\u011fi temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde 4249. sokak no:44 Yunus E. Mahallesi Karaba\u011flar\/izmir adresinde oturdu\u011fu halde adresinin kollukta yanl\u0131\u015f yaz\u0131lmas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek an\u0131lan h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz etti\u011fi, adreslerdeki semt ve numaralar\u0131n ayn\u0131 olmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k sokak numaras\u0131n\u0131n iki hanesinin farkl\u0131 yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 ve yine kolluk ifadesinde mahalle ad\u0131n\u0131n yaz\u0131lmamas\u0131 sebebiyle m\u00fc\u015ftekiye tebligat\u0131n ula\u015famad\u0131\u011f\u0131, adresteki yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n eksik yazma ve maddi hataya dayal\u0131 oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan tebli\u011fnamedeki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceye i\u015ftirak edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6ren m\u00fc\u015ftekinin verdi\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 kolluk ifadesinde san\u0131ktan \u015fikayet\u00e7i olup cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmesi ve yarg\u0131lama sonucunda mahkemece verilen h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz etmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, vaki talebi nazara al\u0131n\u0131p do\u011fru adresine tebligat \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131larak, temin edilecek m\u00fc\u015ftekiye 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun 238\/2. maddesi gere\u011fince davaya kat\u0131lmak isteyip istemedi\u011finin sorulup bu hususta olumlu veya olumsuz bir karar verilmesi gerekti\u011finin g\u00f6zetilmemesi” isabetsizli\u011finden BOZULMASINA karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise 13.4.2012 g\u00fcn ve 205906 say\u0131 ile:<\/p>\n

” Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunun 234. maddesi ma\u011fdurla \u015fikayet\u00e7inin haklar\u0131n\u0131 sayarken kamu davas\u0131na kat\u0131lma ve davaya kat\u0131lma \u015fart\u0131yla davay\u0131 sonu\u00e7land\u0131ran kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurma haklar\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015f, haklar\u0131n ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7iye anlat\u0131larak tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irilmesi gerekti\u011fine i\u015faret etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

C.M.K.nun 260. maddesi de yasa yoluna ba\u015fvurma hakk\u0131na sahip kimseleri Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, \u015f\u00fcpheli, san\u0131k ve kat\u0131lan s\u0131fat\u0131 alm\u0131\u015f olanlarla kat\u0131lma istemi karara ba\u011flanmam\u0131\u015f veya reddolunmu\u015f veya kat\u0131lan s\u0131fat\u0131 alabilecek surette su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f bulunanlar olarak saym\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Somut olay\u0131m\u0131zda ise: iddianameyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda mahkemece m\u00fc\u015ftekinin 25.12.2006 tarihinde kollukta \u015fikayetinin tesbiti s\u0131ras\u0131nda bildirdi\u011fi ikamet adresine duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fc bildirir davetiye \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ancak davetiye ‘belirtilen sokakta 44 hane olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, muhatab\u0131n\u0131n da ismen tan\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131’ belirtilip 22.3.2007 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmeksizin iade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

C.M.K.nun 235\/1-3 maddesinde: ‘ma\u011fdur, \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya vekilinin dilek\u00e7elerinde veya beyanlar\u0131nda belirttikleri adresleri tebligata esas al\u0131n\u0131r. Belirtilen adresin yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131, eksikli\u011fi veya adres de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011finin bildirilmemesi sebebiyle tebligat yap\u0131lamamas\u0131 hallerinde adresin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmez’ h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini i\u00e7erdi\u011fi nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda tebli\u011fnamede temyiz isteminin reddine dair olarak belirtilen gerek\u00e7elerin yasal ve yerinde bulundu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle itiraz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurarak. \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve temyiz talebinin reddine kararverilmesi talebinde 8ulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

C.M.K.nun 308. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapan Yarg\u0131tay 14. Ceza Dairesince 26.12.2012 g\u00fcn ve 11837-13731 say\u0131 ile: itiraz\u0131n yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bahisle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya. Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

KARAR : <\/b>T\u00dcRK M\u0130LLET\u0130 ADINA<\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURUL KARARI<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00d6zel Daireyle Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k: kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda duru\u015fmadan haberdar edilmeyen m\u00fc\u015ftekinin temyiz talebinin kabul edilmesinin isabetli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir, incelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan:<\/p>\n

M\u00fc\u015ftekinin 25.12.2006 tarihinde Konak il\u00e7e Emniyet M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Alsancak Karakol Amirli\u011fine m\u00fcracaat ederek san\u0131ktan \u015fikayet\u00e7i oldu\u011funu bildirdi\u011fi, m\u00fc\u015ftekinin kimlik ve adres bilgilerinin tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irildi\u011fi, ikamet adresi b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne “4200 Sokak No. 44 Karaba\u011flar-izmir”. telefon numaras\u0131 b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne “237 82 13” yaz\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131. Konak il\u00e7e Emniyet M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlan\u0131p Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na sunulan fezlekede m\u00fc\u015ftekinin adresi olarak ayn\u0131 adresin belirtildi\u011fi, iddianamede m\u00fc\u015ftekinin adresinin “4200 Sok. No.44 Karaba\u011flar-izmir olarak g\u00f6sterildi\u011fi. yerel mahkemece m\u00fc\u015ftekinin duru\u015fmaya davet edilmesine dair tebligat\u0131n adres b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne de ayn\u0131 adresin yaz\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, posta g\u00f6revlisince “4200 Sok. 44 hane nosu yoktur. Muhatap ismen tan\u0131nm\u0131yor a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131 yaz\u0131lmak suretiyle tebligat\u0131n bila ikmal iade edildi\u011fi.<\/p>\n

12.6.2007 tarihinde yap\u0131lan duru\u015fmaya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve savunma yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, duru\u015fmadan haberdar olmayan m\u00fc\u015ftekinin ise i\u015ftirak etmedi\u011fi, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n esasa dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirdi\u011fi. yerel mahkemece duru\u015fma sonunda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beraat\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi, ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn karardan haberdar olan m\u00fc\u015ftekinin h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz etti\u011fi, adresinin yanl\u0131\u015f yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 sebebiyleduru\u015fmadan haberdar olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve delillerini bildiremedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle yerel mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fi, temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde adresini “4249 Sok. No:44. Yunus E. Mah.. Karaba\u011flar\/izmir olarak g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi, dilek\u00e7eye ekli m\u00fc\u015ftekinin abone olarak g\u00f6z\u00fckt\u00fc\u011f\u00fc elektrik faturas\u0131nda adresin “4249 sk 44”. telefon numaras\u0131n\u0131n ise m\u00fc\u015ftekinin kollukta bildirdi\u011fi “237 82 13” numaral\u0131 numara oldu\u011fu.<\/p>\n

Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n yerel mahkemece, tebli\u011fnamenin ise \u00d6zel Dairece temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde g\u00f6sterilen “4249 Sok. No:44. Yunus E. Manallesi-Karaba\u011flar-izmir” adresine tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi.<\/p>\n

Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir \u015fekilde \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclebilmesi i\u00e7in ma\u011fdur veya \u015fikayet\u00e7inin duru\u015fmaya \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131lmas\u0131 ve bu davete uymamalar\u0131 nalinde yap\u0131lacak i\u015flemler \u00fczerinde durulmas\u0131nda yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun “Su\u00e7un ma\u011fduruyla \u015fikayet\u00e7inin \u00e7a\u011f\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 233. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131: “Ma\u011fdurla \u015fikayet\u00e7i. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 veya mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131 veya hakim taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131yla \u00e7a\u011f\u0131r\u0131l\u0131p dinlenir”, “Ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7inin davete uymamalar\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 235. maddesi ise: “(1) Ma\u011fdur, \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya vekilinin, dilek\u00e7elerinde veya tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irilmi\u015f olan beyanlar\u0131nda belirttikleri adresleri tebligata esas al\u0131n\u0131r.<\/p>\n

(2) Bu adrese \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lan \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131ya ra\u011fmen gelmeyen kimseye yeniden tebligatta bulunulmaz-<\/p>\n

(3) Belirtilen adresin yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131, eksikli\u011fi veya adres de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011finin bildirilmemesi sebebiyle tebligat yap\u0131lamamas\u0131 hallerinde adresin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmez.<\/p>\n

(4) Bu kimselerin beyan\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 zorunlu g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc hallerde 3. f\u0131kra uygulanmaz” \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Yukar\u0131daki mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri bir b\u00fct\u00fcn halinde de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde: ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7inin, soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda ise mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131veya hakim taraf\u0131ndan usul\u00fcne uygun olarak \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131l\u0131p dinlenmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

Mahkemece kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 olan iddianamenin kabul\u00fcnden sonra duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc belirlenip, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 gereken ki\u015filerden oldu\u011funda teredd\u00fct bulunmayan ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya vekilleri duru\u015fmaya davet edilmelidir. Bu davet C.M.K.nun 37 ve 233. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca kural olarak 7201 Say\u0131l\u0131 Tebligat Kanunu h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131yla yap\u0131lacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Ma\u011fdurla \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya vekillerine tebligat yap\u0131l\u0131rken, dilek\u00e7elerinde veya tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irilmi\u015f olan beyanlar\u0131nda belirttikleri adresler esas al\u0131nacakt\u0131r. Belirtilen adreslere tebligat yap\u0131lmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n, gelmemeleri halinde ilgililere yeniden tebligat yap\u0131lmayacakt\u0131r. Ma\u011fdurla \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya vekillerinin dilek\u00e7elerinde ya da beyanlar\u0131nda bildirdikleri adresin yanl\u0131\u015f veya eksik olmas\u0131 ya da adres de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011finin bildirilmemesi nedenleriyle tebligat\u0131n yap\u0131lamamas\u0131 hallerinde, adreslerinin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmeyecektir. Aksi y\u00f6nde bir uygulama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 yarg\u0131laman\u0131n gereksiz yere uzamas\u0131na neden olabilecektir. Ancak \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc durumlarda, ilgililerin yeni adresleri ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131larak, bu adreslerden davetleri sa\u011flanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu durumda \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131 tebli\u011fine ra\u011fmen gelmeyenlerin de gelmelerini sa\u011flama yoluna gidilmelidir. Zira maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin bulunmas\u0131 i\u00e7in zorunlu g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taktirde, \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya ma\u011fdur mutlaka dinlenilmelidir. \u00c7a\u011fr\u0131ya ra\u011fmen gelmeyen ma\u011fdur veya \u015fikayet\u00e7i hakk\u0131nda C.M.K.nun 146\/7. maddesi uyar\u0131nca zorla getirme karar\u0131 verilebilecektir. Ancak maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin belirlenmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ilgililerin dinlenilmesinin zorunluluk arz etmedi\u011fi durumlarda ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7iyle vekillerinin belirttikleri adreslere bir kez tebligat \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 yeterli olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu a\u015famada ma\u011fdurla \u015fikayet\u00e7inin haklar\u0131 \u00fczerinde durulmas\u0131nda yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7inin haklar\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen “Ma\u011fdurla \u015fikayet\u00e7inin haklar\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 234. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (b) bendi: “Kovu\u015fturma evresinde:<\/p>\n

1. Duru\u015fmadan haberdar edilme.<\/p>\n

2. Kamu davas\u0131na kat\u0131lma.<\/p>\n

3. Tutanak ve belgelerden vekili arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla \u00f6rnek isteme.<\/p>\n

4. Tan\u0131klar\u0131n davetini isteme.<\/p>\n

5. Vekili yoksa, baro taraf\u0131ndan kendisine avukat atanmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme.<\/p>\n

6. Davaya kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olma ko\u015fuluyla davay\u0131 sonu\u00e7land\u0131ran kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 kanun yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvurma” \u015feklinde olup, buna g\u00f6re ma\u011fdurla \u015fikayet\u00e7inin kovu\u015fturma evresinde: duru\u015fmadan haberdar edilme, kamu davas\u0131na kat\u0131lma, tutanak ve belgelerden vekili arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla \u00f6rnek isteme, tan\u0131klar\u0131n davetini isteme, vekili yoksa baro taraf\u0131ndan kendisine avukat atanmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme ve davaya kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak \u015fart\u0131yla davay\u0131 sonu\u00e7land\u0131ran kararlara kar\u015f\u0131 kanun yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvurma haklar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f, maddenin. “Bu haklar, su\u00e7un ma\u011fdurlar\u0131yla \u015fikayet\u00e7iye anlat\u0131l\u0131p a\u00e7\u0131klan\u0131r ve bu husus tutana\u011fa yaz\u0131l\u0131r \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlenen son f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise, bu haklar\u0131n ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7iye anlat\u0131l\u0131p a\u00e7\u0131klanaca\u011f\u0131 ve bu hususun tutana\u011fa yaz\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

An\u0131lan maddenin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (b) bendinin a\u00e7\u0131k d\u00fczenlemesinden de anla\u015f\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, duru\u015fmadan haberdar edilme kanun koyucu taraf\u0131ndan, ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7i i\u00e7in kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda kullan\u0131labilecek bir hak olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re, ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7iye veya vekillerine usul\u00fcne uygun tebli\u011f i\u015flemi yap\u0131lmadan “duru\u015fmadan haberdar edilme” hakk\u0131n\u0131n kulland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahsetmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir. C.M.K.nun 234. maddesi uyar\u0131nca bu hakk\u0131n kulland\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bununla birlikte kanun koyucu 234. maddeye ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131 durumunda an\u0131lan hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n telafisine imkan sa\u011flayacak \u015fekilde bir d\u00fczenlemeye yer vermi\u015f ve “kat\u0131lan s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131 alabilecek surette su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f olanlara” kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurma hakk\u0131 tan\u0131m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in de yarg\u0131lama sonucunda verilen karar\u0131n ayn\u0131 kanunun 35. maddesi uyar\u0131nca ma\u011fdur, \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6rene tebli\u011fi gerekmektedir. B\u00f6ylece gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n tebli\u011f edilmesiyle su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6ren ge\u00e7 de olsa davadan haberdar olarak karar\u0131 temyiz etme imkan\u0131 bulmu\u015f olacakt\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren ma\u011fdur, \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6renin h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz edip etmemesine g\u00f6re de temyizin kapsam\u0131 belirlenecektir.<\/p>\n

Duru\u015fmadan haberdar olmayan ma\u011fdur, \u015fikayet\u00e7i veya su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6rene gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n tebli\u011f edilmesinden sonra veya \u00f6\u011frenme \u00fczerine h\u00fckm\u00fcn temyiz edilmesi durumunda C.M.K.nun 260. maddesi uyar\u0131nca “kat\u0131lan s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131 alabilecek surette su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6ren” s\u0131fat\u0131yla temyizi incelenecektir. Tebli\u011fe ra\u011fmen h\u00fckm\u00fcn temyiz edilmemesi durumunda ise \u00d6zel Dairece di\u011fer temyiz talepleri kapsam\u0131nda dosya incelenecek, ancak C.M.K.nun 233 ve 234. maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn BOZULMASINA karar verilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n

Bu bilgiler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde:<\/p>\n

Soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda \u015fikayet\u00e7i oldu\u011funu beyan eden. izmir Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen iddianamede “m\u00fc\u015fteki” olarak g\u00f6sterilen Mecbure \u00d6zt\u00fcrk’\u00fcn soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda, emniyet g\u00f6revlilerince al\u0131nan ifadesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 bulunan ikamet adresinin 4200. Sokak No:44 Karaba\u011flar\/izmir olmas\u0131, belirtilen adrese mahkemece \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lan tebligat\u0131n tebli\u011f edilmeksizin iade edilmesi. 12.6.2007 tarihli duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lamayan m\u00fc\u015ftekinin, mahkemece verilen beraat h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc haricen \u00f6\u011frenip ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn verdi\u011fi temyiz dilek\u00e7esiyle. 4249. Sokak No:44 Yunus E. Mahallesi Karaba\u011flar\/izmir adresinde oturdu\u011fu halde adresinin kollukta yanl\u0131\u015f yaz\u0131lmas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz etmesi, kolluk ifadesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 adres ile temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde bildirilen adresteki semt ismi ve kap\u0131 numaralar\u0131 ayn\u0131 olup yaln\u0131zca sokak numaras\u0131n\u0131n iki hanesinin farkl\u0131 yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 ve m\u00fc\u015ftekinin kolluk ifadesinde bildirmi\u015f oldu\u011fu ev telefonu numaras\u0131n\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esine ekledi\u011fi elektrik faturas\u0131nda yaz\u0131l\u0131 olan telefon numaras\u0131yla ayn\u0131 olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, adresin m\u00fc\u015fteki taraf\u0131ndan kas\u0131tl\u0131 olarak yanl\u0131\u015f veya hatal\u0131 bildirilmesinin s\u00f6z konusu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ve adresteki yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n maddi hataya dayal\u0131 bulundu\u011funun kabul\u00fc gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

Bu nedenle, kolluk ifadesinde san\u0131ktan \u015fikayet\u00e7i oldu\u011funu bildiren ve kollukta maddi hata sonucu yanl\u0131\u015f yaz\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan adrese \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lan tebligat\u0131n bila ikmal iade edilmesi sebebiyleduru\u015fmadan haberdar olmayan m\u00fc\u015ftekinin temyiz talebinin \u00d6zel Dairece kabul edilmesinde herhangi bir isabetsizlik bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00d6te yandan, iddianamede m\u00fc\u015fteki olarak g\u00f6sterilen Mecbure \u00d6zt\u00fcrk’\u00fcn yerel mahkemece duru\u015fmadan haberdar edilmesi, duru\u015fmada C.M.K.nun 234. maddesindeki haklar\u0131n\u0131n hat\u0131rlat\u0131lmas\u0131, san\u0131ktan \u015fikayet\u00e7i olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, \u015fikayet\u00e7i oldu\u011funu bildirmesi halinde ise davaya kat\u0131lmak isteyip istemedi\u011finin sorulmas\u0131, sonucuna g\u00f6re kat\u0131lma konusunda bir karar verilmesi gerekirken, yarg\u0131lamaya devamla h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fundan, yerel mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00d6zel Dairece: “Su\u00e7tan zarar g\u00f6ren m\u00fc\u015ftekinin verdi\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 kolluk ifadesinde san\u0131ktan \u015fikayet\u00e7i olup cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmesi ve yarg\u0131lama sonucunda mahkemece verilen h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz etmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, vaki talebi nazara al\u0131n\u0131p do\u011fru adresine tebligat \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131larak, temin edilecek m\u00fc\u015ftekiye 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun 238\/2. maddesi gere\u011fince davaya kat\u0131lmak isteyip istemedi\u011finin sorulup bu hususta olumlu veya olumsuz bir karar verilmesi gerekti\u011finin g\u00f6zetilmemesi” gerek\u00e7esiyle bozulmas\u0131nda bir isabetsizlik bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Zira temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde m\u00fc\u015ftekinin \u015fikayete ve davaya kat\u0131lmaya dair a\u00e7\u0131k bir talebi bulunmay\u0131p, davaya kat\u0131lma hususunda C.M.K.nun 237\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca temyiz a\u015famas\u0131nda \u00d6zel Dairece bir karar verilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

Nitekim Ceza Genel Kurulunun 16.4.2013 g\u00fcn ve 2012\/1-1568-141 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 da ayn\u0131 do\u011frultudad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu itibarla. Yarg\u0131tay C.Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n reddine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7 :<\/strong> A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle:<\/p>\n

1-) Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n reddine,<\/p>\n

2-) Dosyan\u0131n, mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na tevdiine. 9.12.2014 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2013\/8-112<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2014\/38<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 4.2.2014<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2022 \u0130DD\u0130ANAMEN\u0130N SANI\u011eA TEBL\u0130\u011e ED\u0130LMEMES\u0130<\/span> (Yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 Haricen \u00d6\u011frenerek Duru\u015fmaya Kat\u0131lan San\u0131\u011fa Savunmas\u0131 Al\u0131nmadan \u00d6nce \u0130ddianamenin Okunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 – San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n S\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131\u011f\u0131)<\/p>\n

\u2022 SAVUNMA HAKKININ SINIRLANMASI<\/span> (\u0130ddianamenin San\u0131\u011fa Tebli\u011f Edilmedi\u011fi ve Yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 Haricen \u00d6\u011frenerek Duru\u015fmaya Kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 – Savunmas\u0131 Al\u0131nmadan \u00d6nce \u0130ddianame Kendisine Okunmam\u0131\u015f Olan San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n S\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131\u011f\u0131)<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u0130DD\u0130ANAMEN\u0130N KABUL\u00dc KARARININ OKUNMAMASI<\/span> (Tek Ba\u015f\u0131na Bozma Nedeni Yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 – \u0130ddianame Okunmadan Sorgusunun Yap\u0131larak 5271 S.K. Md.191\/3-b’ye Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Davran\u0131lmas\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin Ba\u015fka Bozma Nedeni Bulundu\u011fundan Okunmamaya \u0130li\u015fkin Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n Bozmaya Eklenmesi Yerinde Oldu\u011fu)<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u0130DD\u0130ANAME OKUNMADAN SANI\u011eIN SORGUSUNUN YAPILMASI<\/span> (Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n K\u0131s\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131\/5271 S.K. Md.191\/3-b’ye Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Davran\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 – \u0130ddianamenin Kabul\u00fc Karar\u0131n\u0131n\u00a0Okunmamas\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n Bozmaya Eklenmesi Yerinde Oldu\u011fu) 5271\/m.174, 175, 191<\/p>\n

Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131 \u0130le Adli Yarg\u0131 \u0130lk Derece Ceza Mahkemeleri Kalem Hizmetlerinin Y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesine Dair Y\u00f6netmelik\/m.46, 47<\/p>\n

Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesi\/m.6<\/p>\n

\u00d6ZET : <\/b>\u0130ddianamenin san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilmedi\u011fi ve yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 haricen \u00f6\u011frenerek duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lan san\u0131\u011fa savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nmadan \u00f6nce iddianamenin okunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, iddianameden haberdar olmayan ve savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nmadan \u00f6nce de iddianame kendisine okunmam\u0131\u015f olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir. Yerel mahkemece ilk oturumda iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 191\/1. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmakla birlikte bu husus tek ba\u015f\u0131na bozma nedeni yap\u0131lamayacakt\u0131r. Ancak iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle CMK’nun 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin ba\u015fka bir bozma nedeni bulundu\u011fundan, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n da bozmaya eklenmesi yerinde bir uygulamad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

DAVA : San\u0131k Z. A.’\u0131n kat\u0131lan R. B.’e y\u00f6nelik kasten yaralama su\u00e7undan 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 86\/2, 86\/3-e ve 29. maddeleri gere\u011fince 3 ay hapis, kat\u0131lan G. \u00dc.’e y\u00f6nelik kasten yaralama su\u00e7undan ayn\u0131 kanunun 86\/2, 86\/3-e ve 29. maddeleri gere\u011fince 4 ay 15 g\u00fcn hapis, 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7undan ise ayn\u0131 kanunun 15\/1. maddesi gere\u011fince 6 ay hapis ve 450 Lira adli para cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 53. maddesi uyar\u0131nca hak yoksunlu\u011funa ili\u015fkin, Manisa 2. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 25.02.2008 g\u00fcn ve 356-83 say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn, san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 8. Ceza Dairesinin 05\/03\/2012 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/5558-6783 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

\u201c… San\u0131k Z. A.’\u0131n haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu duru\u015fmada iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131 okunmadan duru\u015fmaya ba\u015flanmas\u0131 ve iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle CMK’nun191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k yap\u0131lmas\u0131…”,<\/p>\n

\u0130sabetsizli\u011finden bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise … g\u00fcn ve 158563 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

\u201c… Mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131 veya h\u00e2kim, duru\u015fman\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131 okuyarak a\u00e7\u0131klar. \u00c7a\u011fr\u0131l\u0131p gelen tan\u0131klar duru\u015fma salonundan d\u0131\u015far\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131r, s\u0131ras\u0131yla; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k kimli\u011fi saptan\u0131r, ki\u015fisel ve ekonomik durumu hakk\u0131nda kendisinden bilgi al\u0131n\u0131r, iddianame veya iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunur. San\u0131\u011fa, y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n yasal hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 147. maddesinde belirtilen di\u011fer haklar\u0131 bildirilir. San\u0131k a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmaya haz\u0131r oldu\u011funu bildirdi\u011finde, usul\u00fcne g\u00f6re sorgusu yap\u0131l\u0131r. \u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131 ile kovu\u015fturma evresinin ba\u015flamas\u0131 karar\u0131n yasal bir sonucu olup iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Bu anlamda iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131, bildirici mahiyettedir. Di\u011fer bir ifade ile malumun ilan\u0131ndan ibarettir. Esas\u0131nda baz\u0131 hallerde mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131 veya hakimince okunacak bir karar da bulunmayabilir, zira iddianame ve soru\u015fturma evrak\u0131n\u0131n verildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren en ge\u00e7 on be\u015f g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde iade edilmeyen iddianame kabul edilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r. Bu halde kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen s\u00fcre sonunda ba\u015flar ve do\u011frudan duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131klar\u0131na ge\u00e7ilebilir. Yukar\u0131da belirtti\u011fimiz \u00fczere mahkemenin iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 taraflar\u0131n ba\u015fvurabilecekleri bir ola\u011fan ve ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc herhangi bir yasa yolu bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Bu itibarla iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n taraflara tebli\u011fi gerekmez ve duru\u015fmada okunmas\u0131 bir tebli\u011f i\u015flemi de de\u011fildir. \u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmas\u0131 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 191. madde h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fidir, buna uyulmamas\u0131n\u0131n kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil edece\u011fi hususunda bir ku\u015fku bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ancak her kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k mutlak bir bozma nedeni de\u011fildir. Mutlak bozma sebebi olan kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri 5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasan\u0131n 8\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca uygulanmas\u0131 gereken 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 308. maddesinde say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki hallerde kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n bozma sebebi say\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n son karara (h\u00fckme) tesiri olmas\u0131 gerekir. 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 306. maddesindeki ‘h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan’, 309. maddesindeki ‘h\u00fck\u00fcm i\u00e7in m\u00fchim noktalarda’ ve 320. maddesindeki ‘h\u00fckme tesiri olacak derecede kanuna muhalefet’ ibarelerinin ve kanun (koyucu) abesle i\u015ftigal etmez evrensel hukuk kaidesinin gere\u011fi budur. Ger\u00e7ekten de bozma mahkemece farkl\u0131 bir karar verilebilecekse bir anlam ifade eder. Bozman\u0131n sonunda ba\u015fka bir karar verilemeyecekse bozman\u0131n da bir anlam\u0131 yoktur. B\u00fct\u00fcn bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131 veya hakimince iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131, okuma i\u015fleminin a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 ve bildirici mahiyette bir i\u015flem olmas\u0131 ve son karara bir tesirinin bulunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu duru\u015fmada iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n bozma nedeni yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bir di\u011fer sorun ise san\u0131\u011fa iddianame okunmadan sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n bozma nedeni olup olamayaca\u011f\u0131 noktas\u0131ndad\u0131r. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131l\u0131rken ve haklar\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131l\u0131rken, CMK’nun 147. maddesi gere\u011fi y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7un anlat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunmas\u0131 da incelendi\u011finde su\u00e7laman\u0131n iddianame i\u00e7eri\u011fine uygun bir bi\u00e7imde anlat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan sorgu sonland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra ayn\u0131 duru\u015fmada yak\u0131nan A. Y.’n\u0131n beyanlar\u0131 al\u0131n\u0131rken iddianame okunmu\u015f, bundan sonra san\u0131\u011fa s\u00f6z hakk\u0131 da verilmi\u015ftir. CMK’nun 191. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 usul duru\u015fman\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bi\u00e7imde yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131, savunman\u0131n iddiaya uygun \u015fekilde al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 temin amac\u0131yla tesis edilmi\u015ftir. Burada yaz\u0131l\u0131 usul\u00fcn \u015fekli olarak yorumlanmamas\u0131, i\u015flemin belirtilen amaca uygun ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011finin belirlenmesi gerekir. Somut davada i\u015flem yasan\u0131n belirledi\u011fi amaca uygun bi\u00e7imde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015ftir. O halde bu nedene dayal\u0131 olarak h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131 yasaya uygun de\u011fildir…\u201d,<\/p>\n

G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle itiraz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurarak, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesi i\u00e7in dosyan\u0131n \u00d6zel Daireye g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmesi talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

CMK’nun 308. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapan Yarg\u0131tay 8. Ceza Dairesince … g\u00fcn ve 27198-38456 say\u0131 ile, itiraz nedenlerinin yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bahisle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n

KARAR :<\/strong> \u0130nceleme, san\u0131k Z. A. hakk\u0131nda kurulan h\u00fck\u00fcmlerle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olarak yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n kasten yaralama ve 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilen olayda, \u00d6zel Daire ile Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar; iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131 ve ilk oturumda iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekip gerekmedi\u011finin belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

San\u0131k hakk\u0131nda silahla kasten yaralama ve 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan 27.07.2007 tarihli iddianame ile kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, yerel mahkemece 31.07.2007 g\u00fcn\u00fc iddianamenin kabul\u00fcne karar verildi\u011fi, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda bildirdi\u011fi adresine \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ve iddianame ile 05.11.2007 g\u00fcnl\u00fc duru\u015fma tarihini i\u00e7eren tebligat\u0131n adresten ayr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve yeni adresi bilinmedi\u011finden bahisle iade edilmesi nedeniyle, iddianamenin san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilemedi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

Yerel mahkemece ilk oturumda gelenlerin tespiti ve tan\u0131k yoklamas\u0131 yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131 okunmadan duru\u015fmaya ba\u015fland\u0131\u011f\u0131, duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fc haricen \u00f6\u011frenerek gelen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimlik tespitinin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, CMK’nun 191. maddesi gere\u011fince y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n kanuni hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve CMK’nun 147. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 yasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n anlat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ancak iddianame okunmadan ve y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 anlat\u0131lmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunmas\u0131n\u0131n tespit edildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

Ayn\u0131 oturumda m\u00fc\u015fteki A.Y’ya iddianamenin okundu\u011fu, ad\u0131 ge\u00e7enin ifadesinin tespit edilmesinin ard\u0131ndan tan\u0131k S.K’nin dinlendi\u011fi, s\u00f6zkonusu tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n anlat\u0131m\u0131ndan sonra san\u0131ktan beyana kar\u015f\u0131 diyeceklerinin soruldu\u011fu,<\/p>\n

Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekip gerekmedi\u011finin \u00f6ncelikle de\u011ferlendirilmesinde yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 176\/1. maddesinde iddianamenin \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131 ile birlikte san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilece\u011fi h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 maddenin son f\u0131kras\u0131nda da iddianamenin tebli\u011fi ile duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc aras\u0131nda en az bir hafta s\u00fcre bulunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

CMK’nun \u201c\u0130fade ve sorgunun tarz\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 147. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; \u201c\u015e\u00fcphelinin veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesinin al\u0131nmas\u0131nda veya sorguya \u00e7ekilmesinde a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki hususlara uyulur:<\/p>\n

a) \u015e\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimli\u011fi saptan\u0131r. \u015e\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131k, kimli\u011fine ili\u015fkin sorular\u0131 do\u011fru olarak cevapland\u0131rmakla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

b) Kendisine y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 anlat\u0131l\u0131r\u201d denilmek suretiyle, sorguya \u00e7ekilmeden \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7un anlat\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Ayn\u0131 kanunun “Duru\u015fman\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 191. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise;<\/p>\n

\u201cDuru\u015fmada, s\u0131ras\u0131yla;<\/p>\n

a) San\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k kimli\u011fi saptan\u0131r, ki\u015fisel ve ekonomik durumu hakk\u0131nda kendisinden bilgi al\u0131n\u0131r,<\/p>\n

b) \u0130ddianame veya iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunur,<\/p>\n

c) San\u0131\u011fa, y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n kanun\u00ee hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve 147 nci maddede belirtilen di\u011fer haklar\u0131 bildirilir,<\/p>\n

d) San\u0131k a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmaya haz\u0131r oldu\u011funu bildirdi\u011finde, usul\u00fcne g\u00f6re sorgusu yap\u0131l\u0131r\u201d d\u00fczenlemelerine yer verilerek, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce iddianamenin veya iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belgenin okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

A\u0130HS’nin 6\/1. maddesinin 1. c\u00fcmlesinde; \u201cHerkes, gerek medeni hak veya y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleriyle ilgili nizalar, gerek cezai alanda kendisine y\u00f6neltilen su\u00e7lamalar konusunda karar verecek olan, yasayla kurulmu\u015f ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z ve tarafs\u0131z bir mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan davas\u0131n\u0131n makul bir s\u00fcre i\u00e7inde, hakkaniyete uygun ve a\u00e7\u0131k olarak g\u00f6r\u00fclmesini istemek hakk\u0131na sahiptir…”<\/p>\n

Ayn\u0131 maddenin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise; “Her san\u0131k en az\u0131ndan a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki haklara sahiptir:<\/p>\n

a) Kendisine y\u00f6neltilen su\u00e7laman\u0131n niteli\u011fi ve nedeninden en k\u0131sa zamanda, anlad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir dille ve ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 olarak haberdar edilmek\u2026\u201d h\u00fck\u00fcmleri yer almaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Adil yarg\u0131lama; yaln\u0131zca davan\u0131n erken sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 olmay\u0131p, san\u0131k ile kat\u0131lana t\u00fcm haklar\u0131n\u0131 tamamen kullanma imkan\u0131 sa\u011flanarak yarg\u0131laman\u0131n en az giderle ve en k\u0131sa zamanda sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 oldu\u011fundan, modern hukuk sistemlerinde s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck, do\u011frudanl\u0131k ve y\u00fcz y\u00fczelik ilkeleri kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Kanun koyucu da, CMK’nun 176. maddesinde iddianamenin \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131 ile birlikte san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011fini ve savunmas\u0131 haz\u0131rlanmas\u0131na imkan sa\u011flanmak \u00fczere tebli\u011f ile duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc aras\u0131nda en az bir hafta s\u00fcre bulunmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f, ayr\u0131ca 191. madde ile san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7u ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131yla \u00f6\u011frenmesi ve savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 en iyi \u015fekilde kullanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in iddianamenin okunmas\u0131 zorunlulu\u011funu getirmi\u015ftir. S\u00f6zkonusu d\u00fczenlemeler savunma ve yap\u0131lan isnad\u0131 \u00f6\u011frenme hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda olup, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hakk\u0131ndaki su\u00e7lamalardan haberdar olmas\u0131 ve daha etkili savunma yapmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Nitekim Ceza Genel Kurulunun 04.06.2013 g\u00fcn ve 1401-277 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da benzer hususlara i\u015faret edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

27.07.2007 tarihinde d\u00fczenlenen iddianamenin san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilmedi\u011fi ve yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 haricen \u00f6\u011frenerek duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lan san\u0131\u011fa savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nmadan \u00f6nce iddianamenin okunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, iddianameden haberdar olmayan ve savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nmadan \u00f6nce de iddianame kendisine okunmam\u0131\u015f olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir.<\/p>\n

Bu nedenle, yerel mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle CMK’nun 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131 isabetsizli\u011finden bozulmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin \u00d6zel Daire karar\u0131 yerindedir.<\/p>\n

\u0130lk oturumda iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekip gerekmedi\u011fine gelince;<\/p>\n

5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 2. maddesine g\u00f6re ceza muhakemesinde iddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile soru\u015fturma evresi sona ermekte, kovu\u015fturma evresi ise iddianamenin kabul\u00fcnden ba\u015flay\u0131p son karar\u0131n yani h\u00fckm\u00fcn kesinle\u015fmesine kadar devam etmektedir.<\/p>\n

Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131 \u0130le Adli Yarg\u0131 \u0130lk Derece Ceza Mahkemeleri Kalem Hizmetlerinin Y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesine Dair Y\u00f6netmeli\u011fin 46 ve 47. maddelerine g\u00f6re, Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ad\u0131na haz\u0131rlanan iddianame g\u00f6revli ve yetkili mahkemeye teslim edilecek ve mahkemesince \u201ciddianamenin de\u011ferlendirilmesi defteri\u201dne kayd\u0131 yap\u0131lacakt\u0131r. Bu defter, iddianame ve soru\u015fturma evrak\u0131n\u0131n mahkemeye fiilen verildi\u011fi tarihten ba\u015flayarak, kabul\u00fcne veya iadesine karar verildi\u011fi ana kadar bekletildi\u011fi defter olup mahkemesince verilen kabul veya iade kararlar\u0131 ilgili s\u00fctunlar i\u015flenerek bu deftere kaydedilecektir. \u0130ddianamenin de\u011ferlendirilmesi ve iadesi s\u00fcreci, iddianamenin an\u0131lan deftere kaydedilmek \u00fczere mahkeme h\u00e2kimi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan havale tarihinden itibaren ba\u015flar ve buradan takip edilecektir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fcn\u00fcn ceza muhakemesi s\u00fcrecine etkisi 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 175. maddesinde yer alan; \u201c\u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fcyle, kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olur ve kovu\u015fturma evresi ba\u015flar.<\/p>\n

Mahkeme, iddianamenin kabul\u00fcnden sonra duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fcn\u00fc belirler ve duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 gereken ki\u015fileri \u00e7a\u011f\u0131r\u0131r\u201d \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenleme ile h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

An\u0131lan maddeye g\u00f6re, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile kovu\u015fturma evresine ge\u00e7ilmi\u015f ve kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

CMK’nun \u201c\u0130ddianamenin iadesi\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 174. maddesinin ilk iki f\u0131kras\u0131nda iddianamenin iadesi \u015fartlar\u0131 belirtildikten sonra 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; \u201cEn ge\u00e7 birinci f\u0131krada belirtilen s\u00fcre sonunda iade edilmeyen iddianame kabul edilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r\u201d d\u00fczenlemesine yer verilmi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re, s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde iade edilmeyen iddianame kabul karar\u0131 verilmemi\u015f olsa dahi kabul edilmi\u015f say\u0131lacakt\u0131r. Uygulamada bir k\u0131s\u0131m ilk derece mahkemelerince iddianamenin kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin ayr\u0131 bir karar verildi\u011fi, bir k\u0131s\u0131m mahkemelerce tensip tutana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ilk bendi ile iddianamenin kabul edildi\u011finin belirtildi\u011fi, kimi mahkemelerce de s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde iade edilmeyen iddianame kabul edilmi\u015f say\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in bu konuda herhangi bir karar verilmeksizin kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131na ge\u00e7ildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. CMK’nun 174. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re, iddianamenin s\u00fcresinde iade edilmedi\u011fi ve ayr\u0131ca iddianamenin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmedi\u011fi hallerde iddianame kabul edilmi\u015f say\u0131lacak ve kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131 ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6zkonusu uygulama farkl\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n sonuca etkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Nitekim Ceza Genel Kurulunun 17.05.2011 g\u00fcn ve 85-94 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131 verilmeksizin esasa kaydedilerek duru\u015fmaya haz\u0131rl\u0131k tutana\u011f\u0131 d\u00fczenlenen durumda, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 174\/3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca esasa kay\u0131t edilerek tensip tutana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi tarihin iddianamenin kabul\u00fc tarihi olarak kabul edilmesi gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 191. maddesinin ilk f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise; \u201cMahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131 veya h\u00e2kim, duru\u015fman\u0131n ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131 okuyarak a\u00e7\u0131klar\u201d h\u00fckm\u00fc yer almaktad\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re duru\u015fma, mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131 veya hakimin iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131 okuyarak duru\u015fman\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildirmesiyle ba\u015flamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Ceza Genel Kurulunun 15.05.2012 g\u00fcn ve 361-201 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc, kovu\u015fturma evresine ge\u00e7ilmesi ve kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nemli ve gerekli iken; iddianamenin kabul\u00fcne ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n duru\u015fmada okunmas\u0131 ise yaln\u0131zca a\u00e7\u0131klay\u0131c\u0131 mahiyettedir. Di\u011fer bir anlat\u0131mla, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131 okunmadan duru\u015fmaya ba\u015flanarak yarg\u0131lamaya devam edilmesi halinde, CMK’nun 191\/1. maddesinde yer alan usul kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmakla birlikte yap\u0131lan di\u011fer i\u015flemler varl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ve ge\u00e7erliliklerini koruyacak, bu ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131 gibi h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na da etki etmeyecektir.<\/p>\n

Di\u011fer taraftan, 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8. maddesi uyar\u0131nca halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 308. maddesinin;<\/p>\n

\u201cA\u015fa\u011f\u0131da yaz\u0131l\u0131 hallerde kanuna mutlaka muhalefet edilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n

1- Mahkemenin kanun dairesinde te\u015fekk\u00fcl etmemi\u015f olmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

2- H\u00e2kimlik vazifesine i\u015ftirakten kanunen memnu olan bir h\u00e2kimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak etmesi,<\/p>\n

3- Makbul \u015f\u00fcpheden dolay\u0131 hakk\u0131nda ret talebi vaki olup da bu talep kabul olundu\u011fu halde h\u00e2kimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak etmesi yahut bu talebin kanuna mugayir olarak reddolunmas\u0131 suretiyle h\u00e2kimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak ettirilmesi,<\/p>\n

4- Mahkemenin kanuna muhalif olarak davaya bakma\u011fa kendini vazifeli veya salahiyetli g\u00f6rmesi,<\/p>\n

5- Cumhuriyet M\u00fcddeiumum\u00eesi yahut kanunen v\u00fccudu laz\u0131m di\u011fer \u015fahs\u0131n g\u0131yab\u0131nda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

6- \u015eifahi bir duru\u015fma neticesi olarak verilen h\u00fck\u00fcmde aleni muhakeme kaidesinin ihlal edilmesi,<\/p>\n

7- H\u00fckm\u00fcn esbab\u0131 mucibeyi ihtiva etmemesi,<\/p>\n

8- H\u00fck\u00fcm i\u00e7in m\u00fchim olan noktalarda mahkeme karar\u0131yla m\u00fcdafaa hakk\u0131n\u0131n tehdit edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131\u201d \u015feklindeki a\u00e7\u0131k d\u00fczenlemesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, belirtilen hukuka mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma nedeni say\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in esasa etkili olmalar\u0131 gerekir. Esasa yani yerel mahkemece verilen h\u00fckme etkisi bulunmayan nispi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri ise bozma nedeni olu\u015fturmayacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bununla birlikte uygulamada, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na etkisi olmayan muhakeme hukukuna ili\u015fkin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n tek ba\u015flar\u0131na bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmay\u0131p, ba\u015fkaca bozma nedeni oldu\u011fu takdirde di\u011fer bozma nedenlerine eklenebilece\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

Yerel mahkemece ilk oturumda iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 191\/1. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmakla birlikte bu husus tek ba\u015f\u0131na bozma nedeni yap\u0131lamayacakt\u0131r. Ancak iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle CMK’nun 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin ba\u015fka bir bozma nedeni bulundu\u011fundan, iddianamenin kabul\u00fc karar\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n da bozmaya eklenmesi yerinde bir uygulamad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu itibarla, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131 isabetli olup, itiraz\u0131n reddine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7<\/strong> : A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

1- Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n

2- Dosyan\u0131n, mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 04.02.2014 g\u00fcn\u00fc yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2012\/9-1467<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2013\/610<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 17.12.2013<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

DAVA : <\/b>Mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 151\/1, 58\/6 ve 53. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 4 ay hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fckerrirlere \u00f6zg\u00fc infaz rejimine g\u00f6re \u00e7ektirilmesine, cezan\u0131n infaz\u0131ndan sonra denetimli serbestlik tedbirinin uygulanmas\u0131na ve hak yoksunlu\u011funa ili\u015fkin, Torbal\u0131 1. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 3.11.2008 g\u00fcn ve 154-615 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesince 24.5.2012 g\u00fcn ve 6172-6718 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

“\u0130ddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmak suretiyle C.M.K.nun 147 ve 191\/3-b maddesine muhalefet edilmesi” sebebiyle BOZULMASINA karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise 30.7.2012 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/75874 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

“C.M.K.nun 191\/3. maddesinde iddianamenin duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r olan san\u0131\u011fa okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu d\u00fczenlemeyle ama\u00e7lanan, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hangi su\u00e7tan dolay\u0131 yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 hakk\u0131nda bilgi sahibi olmas\u0131 ve mahkeme huzurunda kendisini savunabilmesidir. \u0130ddianame kendisine tebli\u011f edilen san\u0131k hangi su\u00e7lamayla kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya oldu\u011funu \u00f6\u011frenmi\u015f, C.M.K.nun 147\/1-b maddesinde y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 anlat\u0131m\u0131 dahil, maddede d\u00fczenlenen t\u00fcm haklar\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131lan, dosyadaki \u00f6nceki ifadesiyle n\u00fcfus ve sab\u0131ka kayd\u0131 okunan san\u0131k, iddianameyle uyumlu savunma yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla duru\u015fmada iddianamenin okunmamas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlamamaktad\u0131r. Y\u00fcksek Daire karar\u0131ndaki savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinde isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle itiraz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

C.M.K.nun 308\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapan \u00d6zel Dairece 6.11.2012 g\u00fcn ve 8295-12094 say\u0131yla itiraz nedenlerinin yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bahisle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

T\u00dcRK M\u0130LLET\u0130 ADINA<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURUL KARARI<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilen somut olayda, \u00d6zel Daireyle Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fc\u015ftekilerin kalmakta oldu\u011fu evin balkon ve camlar\u0131na \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmakta oldu\u011fu tezgahtaki karpuzlar\u0131 atarak zarar vermeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131yla d\u00fczenlenen ve mahkemece kabul edilen iddianamenin san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bizzat kendisine usul\u00fcne uygun olarak tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n davetiye tebli\u011fine ra\u011fmen ilk oturuma kat\u0131lmamas\u0131 sebebiyle zorla getirilmesine karar verildi\u011fi ancak adresinde bulunamamas\u0131 \u00fczerine savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla yakalama emri \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2.9.2008 g\u00fcn\u00fc yakalanarak mahkemeye getirilen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 kimlik tespitinden sonra, C.M.K.nun 147. maddesi uyar\u0131nca kanuni haklar\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131l\u0131p sorgusu yap\u0131larak serbest b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, son oturuma kat\u0131lan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n esas hakk\u0131ndaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik de savunma yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun 176. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda iddianamenin \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131yla birlikte san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilece\u011fi h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 maddenin son f\u0131kras\u0131nda iddianamenin tebli\u011fiyle duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc aras\u0131nda en az bir hafta s\u00fcre bulunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Kanunun “\u0130fade ve sorgunun tarz\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 147. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda da;<\/p>\n

“\u015e\u00fcphelinin veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesinin al\u0131nmas\u0131nda veya sorguya \u00e7ekilmesinde a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki hususlara uyulur:<\/p>\n

a-) \u015e\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimli\u011fi saptan\u0131r. \u015e\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131k, kimli\u011fine dair sorular\u0131 do\u011fru olarak cevapland\u0131rmakla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

b-) Kendisine y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 anlat\u0131l\u0131r” denilmek suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilmeden \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa y\u00fcklenilen su\u00e7un anlat\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

“Duru\u015fman\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 191. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda;<\/p>\n

“Duru\u015fmada, s\u0131ras\u0131yla;<\/p>\n

a-) San\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k kimli\u011fi saptan\u0131r, ki\u015fisel ve ekonomik durumu hakk\u0131nda kendisinden bilgi al\u0131n\u0131r,<\/p>\n

b-) \u0130ddianame veya iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunur,<\/p>\n

c-) San\u0131\u011fa, y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n kanuni hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve 147. maddede belirtilen di\u011fer haklar\u0131 bildirilir,<\/p>\n

d-) San\u0131k a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmaya haz\u0131r oldu\u011funu bildirdi\u011finde, usul\u00fcne g\u00f6re sorgusu yap\u0131l\u0131r” d\u00fczenlemelerine yer verilerek, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce iddianamenin veya varsa iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belgenin okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Bu d\u00fczenleme, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en temel haklar\u0131ndan olan”savunma” ve “isnad\u0131 \u00f6\u011frenme” hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda olup, savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce iddianamenin okunmas\u0131yla m\u00fcsnet su\u00e7tan haberdar olmas\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla neyle su\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmesi ve bu kapsamda kendisini daha etkin bir bi\u00e7imde savunmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00d6te yandan, iddianame ve yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunmadan savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131yla C.M.K.nun 191. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda yer alan usul kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 hareket edilmi\u015f olmakla birlikte, san\u0131\u011fa iddianamenin tebli\u011fi ve savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nmadan \u00f6nce de \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7un anlat\u0131lmas\u0131yla su\u00e7tan haberdar olmas\u0131 ve savunmas\u0131n\u0131 iddianamede anlat\u0131lan olay ve y\u00f6neltilen su\u00e7lamay\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131layacak \u015fekilde yapmas\u0131 halinde sadece iddianamenin okunmamas\u0131 sebebiyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kendisini etkili savunamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemeyece\u011fi gibi, buna ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak yap\u0131lan di\u011fer i\u015flemler de varl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ve ge\u00e7erliliklerini koruyacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu a\u015famada mutlak ve nispi bozma nedenleri \u00fczerinde de durulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Usul\u00fc Kanununun 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8. maddesi uyar\u0131nca halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 308. maddesinin;<\/p>\n

“A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da yaz\u0131l\u0131 hallerde yasaya mutlaka muhalefet edilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n

1-) Mahkemenin kanun dairesinde te\u015fekk\u00fcl etmemi\u015f olmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

2-) Hakimlik vazifesine i\u015ftirakten kanunen memnu olan bir hakimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak etmesi,<\/p>\n

3-) Makbul \u015f\u00fcpheden dolay\u0131 hakk\u0131nda ret talebi vaki olup da bu talep kabul olundu\u011fu halde hakimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak etmesi yahut bu talebin yasaya mugayir olarak reddolunmas\u0131 suretiyle hakimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak ettirilmesi,<\/p>\n

4-) Mahkemenin yasaya muhalif olarak davaya bakma\u011fa kendini vazifeli veya salahiyetli g\u00f6rmesi,<\/p>\n

5-) Cumhuriyet M\u00fcddeiumumisi yahut kanunen v\u00fccudu laz\u0131m di\u011fer \u015fahs\u0131n g\u0131yab\u0131nda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

6-) \u015eifahi bir duru\u015fma neticesi olarak verilen h\u00fck\u00fcmde aleni muhakeme kaidesinin ihlal edilmesi,<\/p>\n

7-) H\u00fckm\u00fcn esbab\u0131 mucibeyi ihtiva etmemesi,<\/p>\n

\ud83d\ude0e H\u00fck\u00fcm i\u00e7in m\u00fchim olan noktalarda mahkeme karar\u0131yla m\u00fcdafaa hakk\u0131n\u0131n tahdit edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131” \u015feklindeki a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, belirtilen hukuka mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma nedeni say\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in esasa etkili olmalar\u0131 gerekir. Esasa, yani yerel mahkemece verilen h\u00fckme do\u011frudan bir etkisi bulunmayan nispi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri ise tek ba\u015flar\u0131na bozma nedeni kabul edilemeyecektir. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu ve \u00d6zel Dairelerin istikrarl\u0131 uygulamalar\u0131 da bu y\u00f6ndedir.<\/p>\n

Nitekim 20.5.1957 g\u00fcn ve 5-13 Say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda; “Bir h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 istilzam eylemesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan, sureti mutlakada yasaya muhalefet kafi olmay\u0131p yasaya vuku bulan muhalefetin h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na ve neticesine tesir etmi\u015f veya etmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulunmu\u015f olmas\u0131 icap eyledi\u011fi, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunan h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcye T.C.K.n\u0131n 94. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 ihtarat\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131n, esasa ve sonuca etkili olmamas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren hallerden olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131”, Ceza Genel Kurulunun 29.6.2004 g\u00fcn ve 124-155 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; “Ceza Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc Yasas\u0131n\u0131n 307. maddesine g\u00f6re temyiz, ancak h\u00fckm\u00fcn yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmas\u0131 sebebine dayan\u0131r. Yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k ise bir hukuk kural\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmamas\u0131 veya yanl\u0131\u015f uygulanmas\u0131d\u0131r. An\u0131lan Kanunun 308. maddesinde sekiz bent halinde, tamam\u0131 usule dair olan ve yasaya mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fu varsay\u0131lan haller s\u0131ralanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bozma gerektirip gerektirmeyece\u011fi hususunda Yarg\u0131tay’a ara\u015ft\u0131rma yetkisi tan\u0131nmam\u0131\u015f olan bu hallerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 durumunda h\u00fckm\u00fcn Yarg\u0131tay’ca bozulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Bu madde d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki muhakeme normlar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n son karara etkisi olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n son karara etki etmedi\u011fi, kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n da etkide bulunmayaca\u011f\u0131 muhakkak ise bu ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma sebebi say\u0131lmas\u0131 \u00e7o\u011fu kez yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzamas\u0131ndan ba\u015fka bir i\u015fe yaramayacakt\u0131r. C.M.U.K.n\u0131n 320. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ve Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmeyen husus ve vak\u0131alarla ilgili incelemesini h\u00fckme etkili olabilecek derecedeki hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klarla s\u0131n\u0131rlayan ilke bu hususa i\u015faret etmektedir. Her ne kadar yaz\u0131l\u0131l\u0131k ilkesi gere\u011fince haz\u0131rl\u0131k soru\u015fturmas\u0131nda yap\u0131lan i\u015flemlerin tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irilerek d\u00fczenleyen ve haz\u0131r olan ilgililer taraf\u0131ndan imzalanmas\u0131 gerekli ise de, i\u00e7erikleri san\u0131\u011f\u0131n Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ve sulh hakimli\u011fi ifadelerindeki benzer anlat\u0131mlar\u0131yla teyit edilen kolluk\u00e7a d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f tutanaklara y\u00f6nelik bir sahtelik iddias\u0131nda bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00fcstelik tutanaklar\u0131n sonuncu sayfalar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenleyenler ve san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan imzaland\u0131\u011f\u0131, tutanaklar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011fini do\u011frulayan ba\u015fka kan\u0131tlar bulundu\u011fu dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, i\u00e7eri\u011findeki hususlar\u0131 kan\u0131tlayabilme \u00f6zelliklerinde noksanl\u0131k meydana gelmedi\u011fi saptanan tutanaklar\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m sayfalar\u0131n\u0131n imzalanmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 sonuca etkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkeler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bu husus bozma nedeni say\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r”, 28.2.2012 g\u00fcn ve 294-64 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; “Haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu duru\u015fmada \u015fikayet\u00e7i ve vekilinin davaya kat\u0131lma istemi \u00fczerine san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiinin g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc al\u0131nmadan kat\u0131lma isteminin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturmakta ise de, san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiinin kat\u0131lma karar\u0131ndan haberdar olmalar\u0131, kat\u0131lma karar\u0131 verildikten sonra yap\u0131lan duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmalar\u0131na ra\u011fmen kat\u0131lma karar\u0131 konusunda herhangi bir itirazda bulunmamalar\u0131, h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz eden san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiinin temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde bu konuya dair bir itiraz\u0131n\u0131n bulunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, nispi nitelikteki bu hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n esasa etkili oldu\u011fundan veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir”, 19.2.2013 g\u00fcn ve 1464-61 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda ise; “San\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusuna ge\u00e7ilmeden \u00f6nce hakk\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen iddianamede yer alan su\u00e7lama ve hangi kanun maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131n talep edildi\u011fi konusunda yeterince bilgilendirilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, bu usul h\u00fckm\u00fcne uyulmamas\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na tesir eder nitelikte ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olmay\u0131p mutlak bozma nedenleri aras\u0131nda say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r” sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00d6\u011fretide de; “Haks\u0131z karar\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 demek olan bozman\u0131n i\u015fe yaramas\u0131, yani sonunda ba\u015fka ve hakl\u0131 bir karar verilmesi laz\u0131md\u0131r. E\u011fer \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmden ba\u015fka bir karar verilemeyecekse bozman\u0131n manas\u0131 yoktur. Onun i\u00e7in ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n karara tesirini ara\u015ft\u0131rmak gerekir. Son karar do\u011fru ve hakl\u0131 bulundu\u011funda, ona tesir etmedi\u011fi kabul olunan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar bozma nedeni say\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r” (N. Kunter, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 9. Bas\u0131, s. 529), “Maddi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar daima bozma nedeni olurken, muhakeme hukukuna dair ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar kural olarak her zaman bozma nedeni say\u0131lmazlar. Muhakeme hukukuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k verilmi\u015f karar\u0131 etkilememi\u015fse hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsalar bile bozma nedeni say\u0131lmazlar. \u0130stisnas\u0131 C.M.U.K.nun 308. maddesindeki mutlak bozma nedenleridir. Verilecek karar\u0131 etkilememi\u015f olan muhakeme hukukuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar i\u00e7in son karar\u0131n BOZULMASINA gerek yoktur” (\u00d6ztekin Tosun, Su\u00e7 Muhakemesi Hukuku Dersleri Muhakemenin Y\u00fcr\u00fcy\u00fc\u015f\u00fc, \u0130stanbul 1973, s. 200), “C.M.U.K.nun 308. maddesinde say\u0131lanlar d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki muhakeme hukukuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k mutlak olmayan temyiz sebepleri olarak ifade edilir. Mutlak temyiz nedenleri bulundu\u011funda h\u00fck\u00fcm bozulacakt\u0131r. Mutlak olmayan temyiz nedenlerinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde ise h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulabilmesi i\u00e7in s\u00f6z konusu temyiz sebebinin h\u00fckm\u00fc etkilemi\u015f olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na bak\u0131l\u0131r” (Bahri \u00d6zt\u00fcrk, Uygulamal\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 3. Bas\u0131, s. 611), “Temyiz sebebiyle bozma sebebi birbirlerinden farkl\u0131 kavramlard\u0131r. H\u00fckme tesiri bulunmayan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar bozma sebebi te\u015fkil etmezler” (Feridun Yenisey, Duru\u015fma ve Kanun Yollar\u0131, 2. Bas\u0131, s. 184), “Son kararda var olan hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, mahkemenin son karar\u0131n\u0131 etkilemi\u015f, hukuki ihlal karar\u0131n temellerini olu\u015fturan hukuk normlar\u0131n\u0131n ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan do\u011fmu\u015f ise, bunun temyiz nedeni olarak kabul edilmesi ve karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131 gerekir. Aksine son kararda bir hukuku zedeleme olmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, bu ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k karar\u0131 etkilememi\u015f, mahkemenin son karar\u0131 bu ihlal olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde de\u011fi\u015fmeyecek halde olursa bir temyiz nedeninden s\u00f6z edilemez. Nispi temyiz nedenlerinden s\u00f6z edildi\u011finde, yarg\u0131lama hukuku ihlalinin son karara nispeti, yani etkisi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r” (Erdener Yurtcan, Ceza Yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 Hukuku, 4. Bas\u0131, s. 443), “H\u00fckm\u00fcn usulden bozulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in kanunun ihlal edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 kafi de\u011fildir. H\u00fckm\u00fcn, kanunun ihlaline de istinat etmi\u015f olmas\u0131 laz\u0131md\u0131r. Yani kanun ihlal edilmi\u015f oldu\u011fu i\u00e7indir ki, h\u00fck\u00fcm bu suretle verilmi\u015ftir. E\u011fer kanun ihlal edilmemi\u015f olsayd\u0131, h\u00fck\u00fcm verildi\u011fi gibi verilmeyecek idi. Di\u011fer bir tabirle, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in, h\u00fck\u00fcmle kanunun ihlali aras\u0131nda bir rab\u0131tan\u0131n mevcut olmas\u0131 icap eder” (Baha Kantar, Ceza Muhakemesi Usul\u00fc, 4. Bas\u0131, s. 365), “H\u00fckm\u00fcn sonucunun ba\u015fka t\u00fcrl\u00fc olabilece\u011fi, yani h\u00fckm\u00fcn de\u011fi\u015febilece\u011fi kabul edilmeyen durumlarda usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bozma nedeni say\u0131lmamaktad\u0131r. Kendisine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lan kural, ister mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 gereken, ister iddia yahut itiraz \u00fczerine uygulanmas\u0131 gereken bir kural olsun, h\u00fckm\u00fcn sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirecek nitelikte bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a bozma sebebi de\u011fildir” (Recai Se\u00e7kin, Yarg\u0131tay Tarih\u00e7esi ve \u0130\u015fleyi\u015fi, s. 82), “Her hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k; temyiz, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bozma nedeni say\u0131lmaz. Sadece h\u00fckme esas te\u015fkil eden hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar temyiz nedeni olarak ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir. Ba\u015fka bir de\u011fi\u015fle bir hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n temyiz nedeni say\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131kla h\u00fck\u00fcm aras\u0131nda sebep sonu\u00e7 ili\u015fkisi bulunmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu t\u00fcr hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar, bir muhakemede h\u00fckm\u00fc etkilerken, ba\u015fka bir muhakemede h\u00fckm\u00fc etkilemeyebilir. Bu sebeple her somut olayda hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fc etkileme ihtimali ayr\u0131ca ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u015eu halde, mutlak temyiz nedenleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan ve son karara etkisi olmayan hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar temyiz nedeni say\u0131lamazlar” (Centel-Zafer, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 10. Bas\u0131, s. 751), “Bir hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halinde h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulabilmesi i\u00e7in, bu hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fc etkileyip etkilemedi\u011fi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r. H\u00fckm\u00fc etkilememi\u015f hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar dolay\u0131s\u0131yla h\u00fck\u00fcm bozulmaz” (\u00dcnver-Hakeri, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 6. Bas\u0131, 2.cilt s. 361), “\u015eayet bir hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hali san\u0131\u011f\u0131n lehine bir \u015fekilde h\u00fckme etki ediyor veya lehte ya da aleyhte herhangi bir etkide bulunmuyorsa, bu halde ortada bir temyiz sebebinin oldu\u011fundan bahsedilemez” (\u00d6zbek-Kanbur-Do\u011fan-Bacaks\u0131z-Tepe, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 2. Bas\u0131, s. 719) \u015feklinde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmek suretiyle, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na etkisi bulunmayan ve hukuka kesin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hallerinden say\u0131lmayan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

H\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na etkisi bulunmayan yarg\u0131lama hukukuna dair ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n temyiz incelemesi a\u015famas\u0131nda dosyan\u0131n esas\u0131na girilmeden \u00f6nce tek ba\u015f\u0131na bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Anayasan\u0131n 141. maddesinin 4. f\u0131kras\u0131ndaki; “Davalar\u0131n en az giderle ve m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olan s\u00fcratle sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131, yarg\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6revidir” \u015feklindeki h\u00fckme ve usul ekonomisine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacak, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzamas\u0131na, yeni yarg\u0131lama giderlerine yol a\u00e7acak, ayn\u0131 zamanda Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin “Adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 6. maddesinin; “Herkes gerek medeni hak ve y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleriyle ilgili nizalar, gerekse cezai alanda kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 serdedilen bir isnad\u0131n esas\u0131 hakk\u0131nda karar verecek olan kanuni, m\u00fcstakil ve tarafs\u0131z bir mahkemece davas\u0131n\u0131n makul s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde hakkaniyete uygun ve aleni surette dinlenmesini istemek hakk\u0131n\u0131 haizdir” \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenlemesinin ihlali anlam\u0131na gelecektir.<\/p>\n

Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

\u0130ddianamenin yasaya ve usul\u00fcne uygun olarak san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilmesi, duru\u015fmada da kanuni haklar\u0131n\u0131n hat\u0131rlat\u0131lmas\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u015famalarda iddianamede anlat\u0131lan olay ve y\u00f6neltilen su\u00e7 do\u011frultusunda savunma yapmas\u0131, isnat edilen su\u00e7u kabul etmesi ve ne kovu\u015fturma, ne de temyiz a\u015famas\u0131nda su\u00e7lamayla ilgili olarak yeterince bilgilendirilmedi\u011fi i\u00e7in etkili savunma yapamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir iddias\u0131n\u0131n olmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 oturumda kendisine iddianame okunmamas\u0131 suretiyle C.M.K.nun 191\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusuna ge\u00e7ilmeden \u00f6nce 147. maddedeki t\u00fcm kanuni haklar\u0131 konusunda bilgilendirilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 ve t\u00fcm yarg\u0131lama boyunca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendisini yeterince savunma imkan\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, s\u00f6zkonusu usulh\u00fckm\u00fcne uyulmamas\u0131, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na tesir eder nitelikte bir ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olmay\u0131p, mutlak bozma nedenleri aras\u0131nda da say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu itibarla, Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esastan incelenebilmesi i\u00e7in dosyan\u0131n Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesine g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

\u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan Genel Kurul \u00dcyesi S. Bak\u0131c\u0131; “1- Adil yarg\u0131lama, davan\u0131n sadece erken sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 olmay\u0131p san\u0131k ve kat\u0131lan\u0131n t\u00fcm haklar\u0131n\u0131 tamamen ve en iyi \u015fekilde kulland\u0131klar\u0131, yarg\u0131lamaya esas olan ilkelere uyulan ve en az giderle en \u00e7abuk bitirilen yarg\u0131lamad\u0131r. Davan\u0131n uzad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle savunma hakk\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlanamaz, engellenemez.<\/p>\n

Yasa koyucu, C.M.K.nun 176\/1, 4. maddesinde iddianamenin \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131yla birlikte san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011finin ve savunmas\u0131n\u0131 haz\u0131rlamak \u00fczere tebli\u011fle sorgusu aras\u0131nda bir haftal\u0131k s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mesini aram\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcmle yetinmemi\u015f, 15 madde sonra iddianamenin duru\u015fmada okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini kabul etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Yasa koyucunun yeterli g\u00f6rmedi\u011fi iddianamenin tebli\u011fiyle yetinilmesi, Kanunun amac\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

2-) \u0130ddianame, dava a\u00e7an belge olup C.M.K.nun 170. maddesindeki unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 gerekir. Bu unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mayan iddianameler kabul edilerek yarg\u0131lamaya ba\u015fland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; okunmayan, anlat\u0131lmayan bu eksiklikleri san\u0131k bilmemekte, kendini savunamamaktad\u0131r. Tebli\u011f edilen iddianame 170. maddedeki unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7u \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi kabul olunamaz. \u00c7o\u011fu zaman iddianamelerde deliller g\u00f6sterilmemekte, olaylar mevcut delillerle ili\u015fkilendirilmemekte, san\u0131k lehine olan hususlar belirtilmemektedir. Y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7a dair delillerin ne oldu\u011funu, delillerin olaylarla ne \u015fekilde ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131 bulundu\u011funu, lehine ve aleyhine olan hususlar\u0131n nelerden ibaret oldu\u011funu, 170\/6. madde uyar\u0131nca ceza ve g\u00fcvenlik tedbirlerinden hangisine h\u00fckmedilmesinin istendi\u011fini bilmeyen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n

3-) C.M.K.nun 193\/3-c maddesine g\u00f6re, iddianamenin okunup y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7un, uygulanmas\u0131 istenen maddelerin a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131ndan sonra ”y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n kanuni hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve 147. maddedeki haklar\u0131” a\u00e7\u0131klanacakt\u0131r. \u0130ddianame veya iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunup su\u00e7u anlat\u0131lmadan, haklar\u0131ndan bahsedilmesi, amaca hizmet etmeyen, usulen yap\u0131lan soyut bir bildirim olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

4-) \u0130ddianame veya yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunmadan, su\u00e7u anlat\u0131lmadan C.M.K.nun 191\/3-d maddesi uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131klamaya haz\u0131r oldu\u011funu bildiren san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu beyan\u0131, bir \u015fekilden ibaret olup amaca hizmet etmemektedir.<\/p>\n

5-) C.M.K.nun 191\/3-b maddesinde “okunur, al\u0131n\u0131r, bildirilir, yap\u0131l\u0131r” ibareleri kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup bu h\u00fck\u00fcmler emredici niteliktedir. Vazge\u00e7ilemez, iddianamenin okunmas\u0131n\u0131n faydas\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemez, iddianame tebli\u011f edilmekle bu hususa ihtiya\u00e7 kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n

6-) Yarg\u0131lamada s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesi d\u00fcnya \u00fclkelerince kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Bu ilke gere\u011fince dosyadaki belgeler san\u0131\u011fa okunacak, tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lacak ve C.M.K.nun 217. maddesi g\u00f6zetilerek karar verilecektir. Dava a\u00e7an belge olan iddianame veya yerine ge\u00e7en belgenin de okunmas\u0131, anlayabilece\u011fi c\u00fcmlelerle san\u0131\u011fa su\u00e7unun anlat\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Su\u00e7un, delillerin a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 adil yarg\u0131laman\u0131n ve s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesinin gere\u011fidir.<\/p>\n

Duru\u015fmada iddianame okunmayacaksa, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmaya gelmesine gerek yoktur. Mahkemeye bir mektup yazarak savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapabilir. \u0130ddianamenin tebli\u011fi yetiyorsa, mektupla cevap verilmesi de yeterli olacakt\u0131r. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmaya gelmesine gerek yoktur.<\/p>\n

Halbuki y\u00fcze kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkeleri gere\u011fince san\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmaya gelmeleri, iddian\u0131n anlat\u0131l\u0131p sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge duru\u015fmada okunmadan yarg\u0131lamaya ge\u00e7ilemez. Aksi halde savunma hakk\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlanaca\u011f\u0131, C.M.K.nun emredici olan 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 gibi s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesi de ihlal edilmi\u015f olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

7-) “C.M.K.nun 308. maddesinde say\u0131lan mutlak hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan bozma nedenlerinin esasa etkili olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, h\u00fckme etkisi olmayan nisbi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hallerinin bozma nedeni olamayaca\u011f\u0131na” dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn olayda uygulanma olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc iddianame veya yerine ge\u00e7en belgenin okunmamas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131stlanmas\u0131 olup C.M.K.nun 308\/8. madde h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlalidir.<\/p>\n

Nisbi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, beraat eden san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fcn sorulmamas\u0131, eylemi su\u00e7 te\u015fkil etmeyen san\u0131\u011fa n\u00fcfus ve sab\u0131ka kayd\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131 gibi hallerde s\u00f6z konusudur. Evrensel bir ilke olan savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kutsall\u0131\u011f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak, savunmayla ilgili emredici bir h\u00fckme uymamak, mutlak hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hallerinden olup bir itiraz\u0131n reddine karar verilmelidir” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle,<\/p>\n

\u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan yedi Genel Kurul \u00dcyesi ise; “San\u0131\u011fa iddianame okunmadan sorgusunun yap\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu, bu sebeple itiraz\u0131n reddi gerekti\u011fi” d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle kar\u015f\u0131oy kullanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7 :<\/strong> A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

1-) Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne,<\/p>\n

2-) Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesinin 24.5.2012 g\u00fcn ve 6172-6718 Say\u0131l\u0131 bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na,<\/p>\n

3-) Dosyan\u0131n, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenebilmesi amac\u0131yla Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesine g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na tevdiine, 17.12.2013 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar verildi.<\/p>\n

T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2012\/9-1467<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2013\/610<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 17.12.2013<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

DAVA : <\/b>Mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 151\/1, 58\/6 ve 53. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 4 ay hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fckerrirlere \u00f6zg\u00fc infaz rejimine g\u00f6re \u00e7ektirilmesine, cezan\u0131n infaz\u0131ndan sonra denetimli serbestlik tedbirinin uygulanmas\u0131na ve hak yoksunlu\u011funa ili\u015fkin, Torbal\u0131 1. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 3.11.2008 g\u00fcn ve 154-615 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesince 24.5.2012 g\u00fcn ve 6172-6718 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

“\u0130ddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmak suretiyle C.M.K.nun 147 ve 191\/3-b maddesine muhalefet edilmesi” sebebiyle BOZULMASINA karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise 30.7.2012 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/75874 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

“C.M.K.nun 191\/3. maddesinde iddianamenin duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r olan san\u0131\u011fa okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu d\u00fczenlemeyle ama\u00e7lanan, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hangi su\u00e7tan dolay\u0131 yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 hakk\u0131nda bilgi sahibi olmas\u0131 ve mahkeme huzurunda kendisini savunabilmesidir. \u0130ddianame kendisine tebli\u011f edilen san\u0131k hangi su\u00e7lamayla kar\u015f\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131ya oldu\u011funu \u00f6\u011frenmi\u015f, C.M.K.nun 147\/1-b maddesinde y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 anlat\u0131m\u0131 dahil, maddede d\u00fczenlenen t\u00fcm haklar\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131lan, dosyadaki \u00f6nceki ifadesiyle n\u00fcfus ve sab\u0131ka kayd\u0131 okunan san\u0131k, iddianameyle uyumlu savunma yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla duru\u015fmada iddianamenin okunmamas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlamamaktad\u0131r. Y\u00fcksek Daire karar\u0131ndaki savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesinde isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle itiraz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

C.M.K.nun 308\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapan \u00d6zel Dairece 6.11.2012 g\u00fcn ve 8295-12094 say\u0131yla itiraz nedenlerinin yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bahisle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

T\u00dcRK M\u0130LLET\u0130 ADINA<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURUL KARARI<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilen somut olayda, \u00d6zel Daireyle Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; iddianame okunmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fc\u015ftekilerin kalmakta oldu\u011fu evin balkon ve camlar\u0131na \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmakta oldu\u011fu tezgahtaki karpuzlar\u0131 atarak zarar vermeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131yla d\u00fczenlenen ve mahkemece kabul edilen iddianamenin san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bizzat kendisine usul\u00fcne uygun olarak tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n davetiye tebli\u011fine ra\u011fmen ilk oturuma kat\u0131lmamas\u0131 sebebiyle zorla getirilmesine karar verildi\u011fi ancak adresinde bulunamamas\u0131 \u00fczerine savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla yakalama emri \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2.9.2008 g\u00fcn\u00fc yakalanarak mahkemeye getirilen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 kimlik tespitinden sonra, C.M.K.nun 147. maddesi uyar\u0131nca kanuni haklar\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131l\u0131p sorgusu yap\u0131larak serbest b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, son oturuma kat\u0131lan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n esas hakk\u0131ndaki g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik de savunma yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun 176. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda iddianamenin \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131yla birlikte san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilece\u011fi h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f, ayn\u0131 maddenin son f\u0131kras\u0131nda iddianamenin tebli\u011fiyle duru\u015fma g\u00fcn\u00fc aras\u0131nda en az bir hafta s\u00fcre bulunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Kanunun “\u0130fade ve sorgunun tarz\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 147. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda da;<\/p>\n

“\u015e\u00fcphelinin veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifadesinin al\u0131nmas\u0131nda veya sorguya \u00e7ekilmesinde a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki hususlara uyulur:<\/p>\n

a-) \u015e\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kimli\u011fi saptan\u0131r. \u015e\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131k, kimli\u011fine dair sorular\u0131 do\u011fru olarak cevapland\u0131rmakla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n

b-) Kendisine y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 anlat\u0131l\u0131r” denilmek suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilmeden \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa y\u00fcklenilen su\u00e7un anlat\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

“Duru\u015fman\u0131n ba\u015flamas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 191. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda;<\/p>\n

“Duru\u015fmada, s\u0131ras\u0131yla;<\/p>\n

a-) San\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k kimli\u011fi saptan\u0131r, ki\u015fisel ve ekonomik durumu hakk\u0131nda kendisinden bilgi al\u0131n\u0131r,<\/p>\n

b-) \u0130ddianame veya iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunur,<\/p>\n

c-) San\u0131\u011fa, y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n kanuni hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve 147. maddede belirtilen di\u011fer haklar\u0131 bildirilir,<\/p>\n

d-) San\u0131k a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmaya haz\u0131r oldu\u011funu bildirdi\u011finde, usul\u00fcne g\u00f6re sorgusu yap\u0131l\u0131r” d\u00fczenlemelerine yer verilerek, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce iddianamenin veya varsa iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belgenin okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Bu d\u00fczenleme, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en temel haklar\u0131ndan olan”savunma” ve “isnad\u0131 \u00f6\u011frenme” hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda olup, savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce iddianamenin okunmas\u0131yla m\u00fcsnet su\u00e7tan haberdar olmas\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla neyle su\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmesi ve bu kapsamda kendisini daha etkin bir bi\u00e7imde savunmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00d6te yandan, iddianame ve yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunmadan savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131yla C.M.K.nun 191. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda yer alan usul kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 hareket edilmi\u015f olmakla birlikte, san\u0131\u011fa iddianamenin tebli\u011fi ve savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nmadan \u00f6nce de \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7un anlat\u0131lmas\u0131yla su\u00e7tan haberdar olmas\u0131 ve savunmas\u0131n\u0131 iddianamede anlat\u0131lan olay ve y\u00f6neltilen su\u00e7lamay\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131layacak \u015fekilde yapmas\u0131 halinde sadece iddianamenin okunmamas\u0131 sebebiyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kendisini etkili savunamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemeyece\u011fi gibi, buna ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak yap\u0131lan di\u011fer i\u015flemler de varl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 ve ge\u00e7erliliklerini koruyacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu a\u015famada mutlak ve nispi bozma nedenleri \u00fczerinde de durulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Usul\u00fc Kanununun 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8. maddesi uyar\u0131nca halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 308. maddesinin;<\/p>\n

“A\u015fa\u011f\u0131da yaz\u0131l\u0131 hallerde yasaya mutlaka muhalefet edilmi\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n

1-) Mahkemenin kanun dairesinde te\u015fekk\u00fcl etmemi\u015f olmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

2-) Hakimlik vazifesine i\u015ftirakten kanunen memnu olan bir hakimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak etmesi,<\/p>\n

3-) Makbul \u015f\u00fcpheden dolay\u0131 hakk\u0131nda ret talebi vaki olup da bu talep kabul olundu\u011fu halde hakimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak etmesi yahut bu talebin yasaya mugayir olarak reddolunmas\u0131 suretiyle hakimin h\u00fckme i\u015ftirak ettirilmesi,<\/p>\n

4-) Mahkemenin yasaya muhalif olarak davaya bakma\u011fa kendini vazifeli veya salahiyetli g\u00f6rmesi,<\/p>\n

5-) Cumhuriyet M\u00fcddeiumumisi yahut kanunen v\u00fccudu laz\u0131m di\u011fer \u015fahs\u0131n g\u0131yab\u0131nda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

6-) \u015eifahi bir duru\u015fma neticesi olarak verilen h\u00fck\u00fcmde aleni muhakeme kaidesinin ihlal edilmesi,<\/p>\n

7-) H\u00fckm\u00fcn esbab\u0131 mucibeyi ihtiva etmemesi,<\/p>\n

\ud83d\ude0e H\u00fck\u00fcm i\u00e7in m\u00fchim olan noktalarda mahkeme karar\u0131yla m\u00fcdafaa hakk\u0131n\u0131n tahdit edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131” \u015feklindeki a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, belirtilen hukuka mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma nedeni say\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in esasa etkili olmalar\u0131 gerekir. Esasa, yani yerel mahkemece verilen h\u00fckme do\u011frudan bir etkisi bulunmayan nispi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri ise tek ba\u015flar\u0131na bozma nedeni kabul edilemeyecektir. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu ve \u00d6zel Dairelerin istikrarl\u0131 uygulamalar\u0131 da bu y\u00f6ndedir.<\/p>\n

Nitekim 20.5.1957 g\u00fcn ve 5-13 Say\u0131l\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7tihad\u0131 Birle\u015ftirme Karar\u0131nda; “Bir h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 istilzam eylemesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan, sureti mutlakada yasaya muhalefet kafi olmay\u0131p yasaya vuku bulan muhalefetin h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na ve neticesine tesir etmi\u015f veya etmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn bulunmu\u015f olmas\u0131 icap eyledi\u011fi, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunan h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcye T.C.K.n\u0131n 94. maddesinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 ihtarat\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131n, esasa ve sonuca etkili olmamas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren hallerden olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131”, Ceza Genel Kurulunun 29.6.2004 g\u00fcn ve 124-155 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; “Ceza Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc Yasas\u0131n\u0131n 307. maddesine g\u00f6re temyiz, ancak h\u00fckm\u00fcn yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmas\u0131 sebebine dayan\u0131r. Yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k ise bir hukuk kural\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmamas\u0131 veya yanl\u0131\u015f uygulanmas\u0131d\u0131r. An\u0131lan Kanunun 308. maddesinde sekiz bent halinde, tamam\u0131 usule dair olan ve yasaya mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fu varsay\u0131lan haller s\u0131ralanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bozma gerektirip gerektirmeyece\u011fi hususunda Yarg\u0131tay’a ara\u015ft\u0131rma yetkisi tan\u0131nmam\u0131\u015f olan bu hallerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 durumunda h\u00fckm\u00fcn Yarg\u0131tay’ca bozulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Bu madde d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki muhakeme normlar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n son karara etkisi olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n son karara etki etmedi\u011fi, kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n da etkide bulunmayaca\u011f\u0131 muhakkak ise bu ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma sebebi say\u0131lmas\u0131 \u00e7o\u011fu kez yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzamas\u0131ndan ba\u015fka bir i\u015fe yaramayacakt\u0131r. C.M.U.K.n\u0131n 320. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ve Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmeyen husus ve vak\u0131alarla ilgili incelemesini h\u00fckme etkili olabilecek derecedeki hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klarla s\u0131n\u0131rlayan ilke bu hususa i\u015faret etmektedir. Her ne kadar yaz\u0131l\u0131l\u0131k ilkesi gere\u011fince haz\u0131rl\u0131k soru\u015fturmas\u0131nda yap\u0131lan i\u015flemlerin tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irilerek d\u00fczenleyen ve haz\u0131r olan ilgililer taraf\u0131ndan imzalanmas\u0131 gerekli ise de, i\u00e7erikleri san\u0131\u011f\u0131n Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ve sulh hakimli\u011fi ifadelerindeki benzer anlat\u0131mlar\u0131yla teyit edilen kolluk\u00e7a d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f tutanaklara y\u00f6nelik bir sahtelik iddias\u0131nda bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00fcstelik tutanaklar\u0131n sonuncu sayfalar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenleyenler ve san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan imzaland\u0131\u011f\u0131, tutanaklar\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011fini do\u011frulayan ba\u015fka kan\u0131tlar bulundu\u011fu dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, i\u00e7eri\u011findeki hususlar\u0131 kan\u0131tlayabilme \u00f6zelliklerinde noksanl\u0131k meydana gelmedi\u011fi saptanan tutanaklar\u0131n bir k\u0131s\u0131m sayfalar\u0131n\u0131n imzalanmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 sonuca etkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkeler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bu husus bozma nedeni say\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r”, 28.2.2012 g\u00fcn ve 294-64 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; “Haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu duru\u015fmada \u015fikayet\u00e7i ve vekilinin davaya kat\u0131lma istemi \u00fczerine san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiinin g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc al\u0131nmadan kat\u0131lma isteminin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturmakta ise de, san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiinin kat\u0131lma karar\u0131ndan haberdar olmalar\u0131, kat\u0131lma karar\u0131 verildikten sonra yap\u0131lan duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmalar\u0131na ra\u011fmen kat\u0131lma karar\u0131 konusunda herhangi bir itirazda bulunmamalar\u0131, h\u00fckm\u00fc temyiz eden san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiinin temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde bu konuya dair bir itiraz\u0131n\u0131n bulunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, nispi nitelikteki bu hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n esasa etkili oldu\u011fundan veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir”, 19.2.2013 g\u00fcn ve 1464-61 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda ise; “San\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusuna ge\u00e7ilmeden \u00f6nce hakk\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen iddianamede yer alan su\u00e7lama ve hangi kanun maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131n talep edildi\u011fi konusunda yeterince bilgilendirilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, bu usul h\u00fckm\u00fcne uyulmamas\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na tesir eder nitelikte ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olmay\u0131p mutlak bozma nedenleri aras\u0131nda say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r” sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00d6\u011fretide de; “Haks\u0131z karar\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 demek olan bozman\u0131n i\u015fe yaramas\u0131, yani sonunda ba\u015fka ve hakl\u0131 bir karar verilmesi laz\u0131md\u0131r. E\u011fer \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmden ba\u015fka bir karar verilemeyecekse bozman\u0131n manas\u0131 yoktur. Onun i\u00e7in ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n karara tesirini ara\u015ft\u0131rmak gerekir. Son karar do\u011fru ve hakl\u0131 bulundu\u011funda, ona tesir etmedi\u011fi kabul olunan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar bozma nedeni say\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r” (N. Kunter, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 9. Bas\u0131, s. 529), “Maddi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar daima bozma nedeni olurken, muhakeme hukukuna dair ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar kural olarak her zaman bozma nedeni say\u0131lmazlar. Muhakeme hukukuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k verilmi\u015f karar\u0131 etkilememi\u015fse hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olsalar bile bozma nedeni say\u0131lmazlar. \u0130stisnas\u0131 C.M.U.K.nun 308. maddesindeki mutlak bozma nedenleridir. Verilecek karar\u0131 etkilememi\u015f olan muhakeme hukukuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar i\u00e7in son karar\u0131n BOZULMASINA gerek yoktur” (\u00d6ztekin Tosun, Su\u00e7 Muhakemesi Hukuku Dersleri Muhakemenin Y\u00fcr\u00fcy\u00fc\u015f\u00fc, \u0130stanbul 1973, s. 200), “C.M.U.K.nun 308. maddesinde say\u0131lanlar d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki muhakeme hukukuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k mutlak olmayan temyiz sebepleri olarak ifade edilir. Mutlak temyiz nedenleri bulundu\u011funda h\u00fck\u00fcm bozulacakt\u0131r. Mutlak olmayan temyiz nedenlerinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde ise h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulabilmesi i\u00e7in s\u00f6z konusu temyiz sebebinin h\u00fckm\u00fc etkilemi\u015f olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na bak\u0131l\u0131r” (Bahri \u00d6zt\u00fcrk, Uygulamal\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 3. Bas\u0131, s. 611), “Temyiz sebebiyle bozma sebebi birbirlerinden farkl\u0131 kavramlard\u0131r. H\u00fckme tesiri bulunmayan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar bozma sebebi te\u015fkil etmezler” (Feridun Yenisey, Duru\u015fma ve Kanun Yollar\u0131, 2. Bas\u0131, s. 184), “Son kararda var olan hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, mahkemenin son karar\u0131n\u0131 etkilemi\u015f, hukuki ihlal karar\u0131n temellerini olu\u015fturan hukuk normlar\u0131n\u0131n ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan do\u011fmu\u015f ise, bunun temyiz nedeni olarak kabul edilmesi ve karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131 gerekir. Aksine son kararda bir hukuku zedeleme olmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, bu ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k karar\u0131 etkilememi\u015f, mahkemenin son karar\u0131 bu ihlal olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde de\u011fi\u015fmeyecek halde olursa bir temyiz nedeninden s\u00f6z edilemez. Nispi temyiz nedenlerinden s\u00f6z edildi\u011finde, yarg\u0131lama hukuku ihlalinin son karara nispeti, yani etkisi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r” (Erdener Yurtcan, Ceza Yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 Hukuku, 4. Bas\u0131, s. 443), “H\u00fckm\u00fcn usulden bozulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in kanunun ihlal edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 kafi de\u011fildir. H\u00fckm\u00fcn, kanunun ihlaline de istinat etmi\u015f olmas\u0131 laz\u0131md\u0131r. Yani kanun ihlal edilmi\u015f oldu\u011fu i\u00e7indir ki, h\u00fck\u00fcm bu suretle verilmi\u015ftir. E\u011fer kanun ihlal edilmemi\u015f olsayd\u0131, h\u00fck\u00fcm verildi\u011fi gibi verilmeyecek idi. Di\u011fer bir tabirle, h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in, h\u00fck\u00fcmle kanunun ihlali aras\u0131nda bir rab\u0131tan\u0131n mevcut olmas\u0131 icap eder” (Baha Kantar, Ceza Muhakemesi Usul\u00fc, 4. Bas\u0131, s. 365), “H\u00fckm\u00fcn sonucunun ba\u015fka t\u00fcrl\u00fc olabilece\u011fi, yani h\u00fckm\u00fcn de\u011fi\u015febilece\u011fi kabul edilmeyen durumlarda usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bozma nedeni say\u0131lmamaktad\u0131r. Kendisine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lan kural, ister mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan kendili\u011finden g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutulmas\u0131 gereken, ister iddia yahut itiraz \u00fczerine uygulanmas\u0131 gereken bir kural olsun, h\u00fckm\u00fcn sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirecek nitelikte bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a bozma sebebi de\u011fildir” (Recai Se\u00e7kin, Yarg\u0131tay Tarih\u00e7esi ve \u0130\u015fleyi\u015fi, s. 82), “Her hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k; temyiz, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bozma nedeni say\u0131lmaz. Sadece h\u00fckme esas te\u015fkil eden hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar temyiz nedeni olarak ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilir. Ba\u015fka bir de\u011fi\u015fle bir hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n temyiz nedeni say\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131kla h\u00fck\u00fcm aras\u0131nda sebep sonu\u00e7 ili\u015fkisi bulunmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu t\u00fcr hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar, bir muhakemede h\u00fckm\u00fc etkilerken, ba\u015fka bir muhakemede h\u00fckm\u00fc etkilemeyebilir. Bu sebeple her somut olayda hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fc etkileme ihtimali ayr\u0131ca ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u015eu halde, mutlak temyiz nedenleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan ve son karara etkisi olmayan hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar temyiz nedeni say\u0131lamazlar” (Centel-Zafer, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 10. Bas\u0131, s. 751), “Bir hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halinde h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulabilmesi i\u00e7in, bu hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fc etkileyip etkilemedi\u011fi ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131l\u0131r. H\u00fckm\u00fc etkilememi\u015f hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar dolay\u0131s\u0131yla h\u00fck\u00fcm bozulmaz” (\u00dcnver-Hakeri, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 6. Bas\u0131, 2.cilt s. 361), “\u015eayet bir hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hali san\u0131\u011f\u0131n lehine bir \u015fekilde h\u00fckme etki ediyor veya lehte ya da aleyhte herhangi bir etkide bulunmuyorsa, bu halde ortada bir temyiz sebebinin oldu\u011fundan bahsedilemez” (\u00d6zbek-Kanbur-Do\u011fan-Bacaks\u0131z-Tepe, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 2. Bas\u0131, s. 719) \u015feklinde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmek suretiyle, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na etkisi bulunmayan ve hukuka kesin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hallerinden say\u0131lmayan ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

H\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na etkisi bulunmayan yarg\u0131lama hukukuna dair ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n temyiz incelemesi a\u015famas\u0131nda dosyan\u0131n esas\u0131na girilmeden \u00f6nce tek ba\u015f\u0131na bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Anayasan\u0131n 141. maddesinin 4. f\u0131kras\u0131ndaki; “Davalar\u0131n en az giderle ve m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olan s\u00fcratle sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131, yarg\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6revidir” \u015feklindeki h\u00fckme ve usul ekonomisine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacak, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzamas\u0131na, yeni yarg\u0131lama giderlerine yol a\u00e7acak, ayn\u0131 zamanda Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin “Adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 6. maddesinin; “Herkes gerek medeni hak ve y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckleriyle ilgili nizalar, gerekse cezai alanda kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 serdedilen bir isnad\u0131n esas\u0131 hakk\u0131nda karar verecek olan kanuni, m\u00fcstakil ve tarafs\u0131z bir mahkemece davas\u0131n\u0131n makul s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde hakkaniyete uygun ve aleni surette dinlenmesini istemek hakk\u0131n\u0131 haizdir” \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenlemesinin ihlali anlam\u0131na gelecektir.<\/p>\n

Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

\u0130ddianamenin yasaya ve usul\u00fcne uygun olarak san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilmesi, duru\u015fmada da kanuni haklar\u0131n\u0131n hat\u0131rlat\u0131lmas\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u015famalarda iddianamede anlat\u0131lan olay ve y\u00f6neltilen su\u00e7 do\u011frultusunda savunma yapmas\u0131, isnat edilen su\u00e7u kabul etmesi ve ne kovu\u015fturma, ne de temyiz a\u015famas\u0131nda su\u00e7lamayla ilgili olarak yeterince bilgilendirilmedi\u011fi i\u00e7in etkili savunma yapamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir iddias\u0131n\u0131n olmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n

San\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 oturumda kendisine iddianame okunmamas\u0131 suretiyle C.M.K.nun 191\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusuna ge\u00e7ilmeden \u00f6nce 147. maddedeki t\u00fcm kanuni haklar\u0131 konusunda bilgilendirilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 ve t\u00fcm yarg\u0131lama boyunca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kendisini yeterince savunma imkan\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, s\u00f6zkonusu usulh\u00fckm\u00fcne uyulmamas\u0131, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131na tesir eder nitelikte bir ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olmay\u0131p, mutlak bozma nedenleri aras\u0131nda da say\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu itibarla, Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esastan incelenebilmesi i\u00e7in dosyan\u0131n Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesine g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

\u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan Genel Kurul \u00dcyesi S. Bak\u0131c\u0131; “1- Adil yarg\u0131lama, davan\u0131n sadece erken sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 olmay\u0131p san\u0131k ve kat\u0131lan\u0131n t\u00fcm haklar\u0131n\u0131 tamamen ve en iyi \u015fekilde kulland\u0131klar\u0131, yarg\u0131lamaya esas olan ilkelere uyulan ve en az giderle en \u00e7abuk bitirilen yarg\u0131lamad\u0131r. Davan\u0131n uzad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle savunma hakk\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlanamaz, engellenemez.<\/p>\n

Yasa koyucu, C.M.K.nun 176\/1, 4. maddesinde iddianamenin \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131yla birlikte san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011finin ve savunmas\u0131n\u0131 haz\u0131rlamak \u00fczere tebli\u011fle sorgusu aras\u0131nda bir haftal\u0131k s\u00fcrenin ge\u00e7mesini aram\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcmle yetinmemi\u015f, 15 madde sonra iddianamenin duru\u015fmada okunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini kabul etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Yasa koyucunun yeterli g\u00f6rmedi\u011fi iddianamenin tebli\u011fiyle yetinilmesi, Kanunun amac\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

2-) \u0130ddianame, dava a\u00e7an belge olup C.M.K.nun 170. maddesindeki unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 gerekir. Bu unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mayan iddianameler kabul edilerek yarg\u0131lamaya ba\u015fland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; okunmayan, anlat\u0131lmayan bu eksiklikleri san\u0131k bilmemekte, kendini savunamamaktad\u0131r. Tebli\u011f edilen iddianame 170. maddedeki unsurlar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7u \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fi kabul olunamaz. \u00c7o\u011fu zaman iddianamelerde deliller g\u00f6sterilmemekte, olaylar mevcut delillerle ili\u015fkilendirilmemekte, san\u0131k lehine olan hususlar belirtilmemektedir. Y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7a dair delillerin ne oldu\u011funu, delillerin olaylarla ne \u015fekilde ba\u011flant\u0131s\u0131 bulundu\u011funu, lehine ve aleyhine olan hususlar\u0131n nelerden ibaret oldu\u011funu, 170\/6. madde uyar\u0131nca ceza ve g\u00fcvenlik tedbirlerinden hangisine h\u00fckmedilmesinin istendi\u011fini bilmeyen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n

3-) C.M.K.nun 193\/3-c maddesine g\u00f6re, iddianamenin okunup y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7un, uygulanmas\u0131 istenen maddelerin a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131ndan sonra ”y\u00fcklenen su\u00e7 hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131klamada bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n kanuni hakk\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve 147. maddedeki haklar\u0131” a\u00e7\u0131klanacakt\u0131r. \u0130ddianame veya iddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunup su\u00e7u anlat\u0131lmadan, haklar\u0131ndan bahsedilmesi, amaca hizmet etmeyen, usulen yap\u0131lan soyut bir bildirim olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

4-) \u0130ddianame veya yerine ge\u00e7en belge okunmadan, su\u00e7u anlat\u0131lmadan C.M.K.nun 191\/3-d maddesi uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131klamaya haz\u0131r oldu\u011funu bildiren san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu beyan\u0131, bir \u015fekilden ibaret olup amaca hizmet etmemektedir.<\/p>\n

5-) C.M.K.nun 191\/3-b maddesinde “okunur, al\u0131n\u0131r, bildirilir, yap\u0131l\u0131r” ibareleri kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olup bu h\u00fck\u00fcmler emredici niteliktedir. Vazge\u00e7ilemez, iddianamenin okunmas\u0131n\u0131n faydas\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclemez, iddianame tebli\u011f edilmekle bu hususa ihtiya\u00e7 kalmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez.<\/p>\n

6-) Yarg\u0131lamada s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesi d\u00fcnya \u00fclkelerince kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Bu ilke gere\u011fince dosyadaki belgeler san\u0131\u011fa okunacak, tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lacak ve C.M.K.nun 217. maddesi g\u00f6zetilerek karar verilecektir. Dava a\u00e7an belge olan iddianame veya yerine ge\u00e7en belgenin de okunmas\u0131, anlayabilece\u011fi c\u00fcmlelerle san\u0131\u011fa su\u00e7unun anlat\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Su\u00e7un, delillerin a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 adil yarg\u0131laman\u0131n ve s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesinin gere\u011fidir.<\/p>\n

Duru\u015fmada iddianame okunmayacaksa, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmaya gelmesine gerek yoktur. Mahkemeye bir mektup yazarak savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapabilir. \u0130ddianamenin tebli\u011fi yetiyorsa, mektupla cevap verilmesi de yeterli olacakt\u0131r. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmaya gelmesine gerek yoktur.<\/p>\n

Halbuki y\u00fcze kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k, s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkeleri gere\u011fince san\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmaya gelmeleri, iddian\u0131n anlat\u0131l\u0131p sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ddianame yerine ge\u00e7en belge duru\u015fmada okunmadan yarg\u0131lamaya ge\u00e7ilemez. Aksi halde savunma hakk\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlanaca\u011f\u0131, C.M.K.nun emredici olan 191\/3-b maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 gibi s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesi de ihlal edilmi\u015f olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

7-) “C.M.K.nun 308. maddesinde say\u0131lan mutlak hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan bozma nedenlerinin esasa etkili olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, h\u00fckme etkisi olmayan nisbi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hallerinin bozma nedeni olamayaca\u011f\u0131na” dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn olayda uygulanma olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc iddianame veya yerine ge\u00e7en belgenin okunmamas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131stlanmas\u0131 olup C.M.K.nun 308\/8. madde h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlalidir.<\/p>\n

Nisbi hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, beraat eden san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fcn sorulmamas\u0131, eylemi su\u00e7 te\u015fkil etmeyen san\u0131\u011fa n\u00fcfus ve sab\u0131ka kayd\u0131n\u0131n okunmamas\u0131 gibi hallerde s\u00f6z konusudur. Evrensel bir ilke olan savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kutsall\u0131\u011f\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak, savunmayla ilgili emredici bir h\u00fckme uymamak, mutlak hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k hallerinden olup bir itiraz\u0131n reddine karar verilmelidir” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle,<\/p>\n

\u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan yedi Genel Kurul \u00dcyesi ise; “San\u0131\u011fa iddianame okunmadan sorgusunun yap\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu, bu sebeple itiraz\u0131n reddi gerekti\u011fi” d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle kar\u015f\u0131oy kullanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7 : <\/b>A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

1-) Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne,<\/span><\/p>\n

2-) Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesinin 24.5.2012 g\u00fcn ve 6172-6718 Say\u0131l\u0131 bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na,<\/span><\/p>\n

3-) Dosyan\u0131n, h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenebilmesi amac\u0131yla Yarg\u0131tay 9. Ceza Dairesine g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na tevdiine, 17.12.2013 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar verildi.<\/span><\/p>\n

T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2011\/5-341<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2012\/33<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 14.2.2012<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u2022 C\u0130NSEL \u0130ST\u0130SMAR SU\u00c7U ( Ruh Sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n Bozulup Bozulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin Raporun Adli T\u0131p Kurumu Yerine \u00dcniversite Hastanesinden Al\u0131nabilece\u011fi – Ancak \u00dc\u00e7 Ki\u015filik Bilirki\u015fi Kurulunca D\u00fczenlenmi\u015f Olan Rapor Esas Al\u0131narak H\u00fck\u00fcm Kurulamayaca\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

\u2022 \u00c7OCU\u011eUN RUH SA\u011eLI\u011eININ BOZULUP BOZULMADI\u011eININ TESP\u0130T ED\u0130LMES\u0130 ( \u0130\u00e7erisinde Zorunlu Olarak \u00c7ocuk Psikiyatristi Bulunan En Az Be\u015f Ki\u015filik Bir Bilirki\u015fi Heyetinden Rapor Al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131 – \u00c7ocu\u011fun Cinsel \u0130stismar\u0131 Su\u00e7u )<\/p>\n

\u2022 B\u0130L\u0130RK\u0130\u015e\u0130 RAPORU ( \u00c7ocu\u011fun Cinsel \u0130stismar\u0131 Su\u00e7u – \u00dc\u00e7 Ki\u015filik Bilirki\u015fi Kurulunca D\u00fczenlenmi\u015f Olan Rapor Esas Al\u0131narak H\u00fck\u00fcm Kurulamayaca\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

\u2022 MA\u011eDURELER\u0130N SORU\u015eTURMA A\u015eAMASINDA ALINAN BEYANLARININ DURU\u015eMADA OKUNMAMASI ( Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu – \u00c7ocu\u011fun Cinsel \u0130stismar\u0131 Su\u00e7u )<\/p>\n

\u2022 DURU\u015eMADA OKUNMASI ZORUNLU BELGE VE TUTANAKLAR<\/span> ( \u00c7ocu\u011fun Cinsel \u0130stismar\u0131 Su\u00e7u – Ma\u011fdurelerin Soru\u015fturma A\u015famas\u0131nda Al\u0131nan Beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n Duru\u015fmada\u00a0Okunmamas\u0131n\u0131n Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu ) 5237\/m.103 5271\/m.209 2659\/m.7, 31<\/p>\n

\u00d6ZET : <\/b>Cinsel istismar su\u00e7unda; uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar; ma\u011fdurelerin maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7u sebebiyle ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011funa dair ikisi adli t\u0131p uzman\u0131, biri \u00e7ocuk ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hastal\u0131klar\u0131 uzman\u0131ndan olu\u015fan \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik bilirki\u015fi kurulunca d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olan raporun h\u00fckme esas almaya yeterli nitelikte bir rapor olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

\u0130\u015flenen su\u00e7un etkisiyle psikolojisi bozulan \u00e7ocuk veya ma\u011fdurun bu su\u00e7a dair soru\u015fturma veya kovu\u015fturmada bir defa dinlenmesinin yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

Yerel mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan su\u00e7 tarihinde 15 ya\u015f\u0131ndan k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck olan cinsel istismar su\u00e7unun ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7 sonucunda ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozulup bozulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair raporun Adli T\u0131p Kurumu yerine \u00dcniversite Hastanelerinden al\u0131nmas\u0131nda bir isabetsizlik bulunmamakta ise de; Adli T\u0131p Kurumu 6. \u0130htisas Kurulunda yer almas\u0131 gereken uzmanl\u0131k dallar\u0131nda g\u00f6revli uzmanlar aras\u0131ndan se\u00e7ilecek ve i\u00e7erisinde zorunlu olarak \u00e7ocuk psikiyatrisi bulunan en az be\u015f ki\u015filik bir bilirki\u015fi heyetinden rapor al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekirken, \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik bilirki\u015fi kurulunca d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olan rapor esas al\u0131narak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 isabetsizdir. Bu itibarla yerel mahkemenin, yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f i\u00e7erik olarak yetersiz tan\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de eksik olan bir raporu h\u00fckm\u00fcne esas almak suretiyle san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda su\u00e7 nitelemesi ve mahkumiyet karar\u0131 vermesi isabetsizdir.<\/p>\n

Soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda dinlenilen ma\u011fdurelerin anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na dair tutanaklar\u0131n duru\u015fmada okunarak, taraflardan diyecekleri sorulmadan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 suretiyle, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n do\u011frudan do\u011fruyal\u0131k, y\u00fcz y\u00fczelik ve s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, yerel mahkeme direnme h\u00fckm\u00fc bu y\u00f6nden de yerinde de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

DAVA : Cinsel istismar su\u00e7undan san\u0131k S.A.’n\u0131n ma\u011fdure \u0130. K.’a y\u00f6nelik eylemi sebebiyle 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.n\u0131n 103\/1-6 ve 62. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 12 y\u0131l 6 ay hapis, ma\u011fdure A. S. B.’a y\u00f6nelik eylemi nedeniylede T.C.K.n\u0131n 103\/1-6 ve 62. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 12 y\u0131l 6 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na dair Ankara 10. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 18.05.2010 g\u00fcn ve 201-142 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn, san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 5. Ceza Dairesinin 2.3.2011 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/10965-1553 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

“… 1- Cinsel istismar eylemleri neticesinde 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 103\/6. maddesi anlam\u0131nda ma\u011fdurelerin ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozulup bozulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda Adli T\u0131p Kurumu ilgili \u0130htisas Kurulundan rapor al\u0131n\u0131p, sonucuna g\u00f6re san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hukuki durumunun tayin ve takdiri gerekti\u011finin g\u00f6zetilmemesi,<\/p>\n

2- ) C.M.K.nun 236\/3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca haz\u0131r edilecek uzman ki\u015fi huzuruyla ma\u011fdureler dinlenmeden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131…”,<\/p>\n

\u0130sabetsizliklerinden BOZULMASINA karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Bozmadan sonra yeniden yarg\u0131lama yapan Ankara 10. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince 2.6.2011 g\u00fcn ve 132-211 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

“\u2026 Ma\u011fdure \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n her dinlemede psikolojileri daha da bozulaca\u011f\u0131ndan al\u0131nan beyanlar, doktor raporu ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde ma\u011fdur \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k ifadeleri ve raporlarda dikkate al\u0131narak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n daha \u00f6nce mahkumiyetine karar verildi\u011finden bu sebeple ma\u011fdurelerin 2. kez dinlenmelerinde yasal zorunluluk da bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ve haz\u0131rl\u0131kta usul\u00fcne uygun olarak al\u0131nan beyanlar yeterli g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden ma\u011fdurelerin yeniden celp ve dinlenmelerine gerek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

Ma\u011fdurelere ait Hacettepe \u00dcniversitesi Hastanesinden verilen her iki raporda birbirini teyit etmekte ve sonu\u00e7ta olay sebebiyle su\u00e7un sonucunda ma\u011fdurelerin ruh sa\u011fl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011funa dair uzman heyetin raporlar\u0131n\u0131n mevcut oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve b\u00f6ylece gerek ma\u011fdurelerin psikolojik durumlar\u0131n\u0131n yeniden bozulmamas\u0131 ve gerekse olay\u0131n olu\u015f \u015fekli ve Hacettepe \u00dcniversitesinden verilen raporlar\u0131n kapsam\u0131 da nazara al\u0131narak ma\u011fdurelerin yeniden \u0130stanbul Adli T\u0131p Kurumuna g\u00f6nderilerek su\u00e7un sonucunda beden ve ruh sa\u011fl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n bozulup bozulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair rapor ald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na mahkememizce gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011fi…”,<\/p>\n

Gerek\u00e7eleriyle direnilerek, ilk h\u00fck\u00fcmdeki gibi karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Bu h\u00fckm\u00fcn de san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay C. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n “bozma” istekli 27.9.2011 g\u00fcn ve 255780 Say\u0131l\u0131 tebli\u011fnamesiyle dosya Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilmekle, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n

KARAR : <\/b>San\u0131\u011f\u0131n, ma\u011fdurelere kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011finden bahisle h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne karar verilen olayda, \u00d6zel Daire ile yerel mahkeme aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar;<\/p>\n

1- ) Ma\u011fdurelerin maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7u sebebiyle ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011funa dair ikisi adli t\u0131p uzman\u0131, biri \u00e7ocuk ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hastal\u0131klar\u0131 uzman\u0131ndan olu\u015fan \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik bilirki\u015fi kurulunca d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olan raporun h\u00fckme esas almaya yeterli nitelikte bir rapor olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

2- ) \u0130\u015flenen su\u00e7un etkisiyle psikolojisi bozulan \u00e7ocuk veya ma\u011fdurun bu su\u00e7a dair soru\u015fturma veya kovu\u015fturmada bir defa dinlenmesinin yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

\u0130ncelenen dosya i\u00e7eri\u011finden;<\/p>\n

Soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda ma\u011fdure A. S. B.’\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131n avukat ve sosyal hizmetler uzman\u0131n\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 ile kolluk g\u00f6revlilerince, ma\u011fdure \u0130. K.’\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131n ise avukat ve psikologun kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 ile C.savc\u0131s\u0131nca al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, ifade alma i\u015flemlerinin ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc olarak kaydedildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda mahkeme huzurunda ifadelerinin al\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi mahkemece soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nan ifade tutanaklar\u0131n\u0131n duru\u015fmada okunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

Soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda ma\u011fdurelerin Hacettepe \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi \u00c7ocuk Ruh Sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Hastal\u0131klar\u0131 Ana Bilim Dal\u0131 Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na sevk edildi\u011fi, an\u0131lan k\u00fcrs\u00fcde g\u00f6revli 5 \u00e7ocuk ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hastal\u0131klar\u0131 uzman\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen 18.5.2009 tarihli raporlarda herhangi bir tan\u0131ya yer verilmeksizin ma\u011fdurelerin maruz kald\u0131klar\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7u sebebiyle ruh sa\u011fl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011funun belirtildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

Yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda ise mahkemece ma\u011fdurelerin yeniden Hacettepe \u00dcniversitesi T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi \u00c7ocuk Ruh Sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Hastal\u0131klar\u0131 Ana Bilim Dal\u0131 Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na sevk edildi\u011fi, bu kez adli t\u0131p uzman\u0131n\u0131n kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 ile olu\u015fturulacak bilirki\u015fi kurulunca rapor d\u00fczenlenmesinin istenildi\u011fi, biri \u00e7ocuk ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hastal\u0131klar\u0131 uzman\u0131 ile ikisi adli t\u0131p uzman\u0131ndan olu\u015fan \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik bilirki\u015fi kurulunca 1.3.2011 tarihli raporlar\u0131n d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, bu raporlarda da herhangi bir tan\u0131ya yer verilmeksizin ma\u011fdurelerin cinsel istismar su\u00e7u sebebiyle ruh sa\u011fl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011funun bildirildi\u011fi, yerel mahkemece an\u0131lan raporlar esas al\u0131narak h\u00fck\u00fcm kuruldu\u011fu,<\/p>\n

Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n s\u0131ras\u0131yla de\u011ferlendirilmesinde yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

1- ) \u0130kisi adli t\u0131p ile biri \u00e7ocuk ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hastal\u0131klar\u0131 uzman\u0131ndan olu\u015fan \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik bilirki\u015fi kurulunun d\u00fczenlemi\u015f oldu\u011fu raporun h\u00fckme esas almaya yeterli nitelikte bir rapor olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131:<\/p>\n

Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcnde sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir hukuki sonuca var\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in 2659 Say\u0131l\u0131 Adli T\u0131p Kurumu Yasas\u0131n\u0131n, cinsel dokunulmazl\u0131\u011fa kar\u015f\u0131 su\u00e7lar ile ilgili olarak rapor d\u00fczenlemekle g\u00f6revli Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Adli T\u0131p \u0130htisas Kurulu ba\u015fta olmak \u00fczere \u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131n\u0131n kurulu\u015f \u015fekli ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma d\u00fczeni hakk\u0131ndaki d\u00fczenlemelerinin incelenmesinde yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Adalet i\u015flerinde resmi bilirki\u015fi olarak g\u00f6revlendirilen Adli T\u0131p Kurumunun kurulu\u015f ve \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u015fekli 25.2.2003 tarihli Resmi Gazetede yay\u0131mlanarak, yay\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00fc\u00e7 ay sonra y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 4810 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ile k\u00f6kl\u00fc de\u011fi\u015fikliklere u\u011fram\u0131\u015f bulunan 2659 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun ile d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

An\u0131lan Yasan\u0131n, “Adli T\u0131p \u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 7. maddesi;<\/p>\n

“Adli T\u0131p Kurumunda alt\u0131 ihtisas kurulu bulunur. A\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki ihtisas kurullar\u0131, bir ba\u015fkan ve adli t\u0131p uzman\u0131 iki \u00fcye ile;<\/p>\n

\u2026f ) Alt\u0131nc\u0131 Adli T\u0131p \u0130htisas Kurulu birer;<\/p>\n

– Kad\u0131n Hastal\u0131klar\u0131 ve Do\u011fum,<\/p>\n

– Radyoloji,<\/p>\n

– \u00dcroloji,<\/p>\n

– Ruh Sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Hastal\u0131klar\u0131,<\/p>\n

– \u00c7ocuk Psikiyatrisi,<\/p>\n

– Adli Antropoloji,<\/p>\n

– \u00c7ocuk Cerrahisi,<\/p>\n

Uzmanlar\u0131ndan olu\u015fur.<\/p>\n

\u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131nda yeteri kadar raport\u00f6r bulundurulur” h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc;<\/p>\n

“Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulunun ve \u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131n\u0131n \u00c7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 23. maddesi;<\/p>\n

“A ) Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulu, \u2026<\/p>\n

B- ) Adli T\u0131p \u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131n\u0131n \u00c7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131:<\/p>\n

Adli T\u0131p \u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131 Ba\u015fkan\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re en az d\u00f6rt \u00fcye ile toplan\u0131r ve oy\u00e7oklu\u011fu ile karar al\u0131r. Oylar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi halinde Ba\u015fkan\u0131n bulundu\u011fu taraf oy \u00e7oklu\u011funu sa\u011flam\u0131\u015f say\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n

\u00dcyelerden birinin \u00f6z\u00fcrl\u00fc olmas\u0131 veya yoklu\u011fu halinde eksiklik di\u011fer kurullardan al\u0131nacak \u00fcye ile tamamlan\u0131r. \u015eu kadar ki tetkik edilecek konu, ilgili uzman \u00fcye haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131k\u00e7a m\u00fczakere edilemez.<\/p>\n

C- ) Adli T\u0131p Kurumu Genel Kurulu ve \u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131 l\u00fczum g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc hallerde karar\u0131n\u0131 vermeden \u00f6nce inceledi\u011fi konu ile ilgili bulunan evrak\u0131n onanm\u0131\u015f \u00f6rneklerini mahallinden isteyebilece\u011fi gibi asl\u0131 \u00fczerinde de inceleme yapmas\u0131 zorunlu oldu\u011funda bunlar\u0131 da isteyebilir.<\/p>\n

Adli T\u0131p Kurumu Genel Kurulu ve \u0130htisas Kurullar\u0131 ilgili ki\u015fileri gerekti\u011finde muayene ve bunlar\u0131 usul\u00fcne g\u00f6re dinleyebilir. Her t\u00fcrl\u00fc tetkikat\u0131 yapar ve yapt\u0131rabilir.<\/p>\n

Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulu kararlar\u0131 nihai olmakla beraber mahkemelerin delilleri serbest\u00e7e takdir hususundaki yetkilerini k\u0131s\u0131tlamaz.<\/p>\n

Umumi H\u0131fz\u0131ss\u0131hha Kanununun 10 ncu maddesinin h\u00fck\u00fcmleri sakl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulu ve adli t\u0131p ihtisas kurullar\u0131n\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma esas ve usulleri y\u00f6netmelikte g\u00f6sterilir” h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc,<\/p>\n

“Adli T\u0131p Kurumunda bilirki\u015fi dinlenmesi ve toplant\u0131lara kat\u0131lma” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 24. maddesi;<\/p>\n

“I- Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulu ve adli t\u0131p ihtisas kurullar\u0131 ile adli t\u0131p ihtisas daireleri, inceledikleri konularla ilgili olarak Adli T\u0131p Kurumunda bulunmayan t\u0131p ve di\u011fer uzmanl\u0131k dallar\u0131nda Adli T\u0131p Kurumu d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndan uzmanlar\u0131n bilirki\u015fi olarak davet edilmesine karar verebilirler. Uzman ki\u015filer oy haklar\u0131 olmamakla beraber g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerini bir raporla Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulu, adli t\u0131p ihtisas kurulu veya adli t\u0131p ihtisas dairesi ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na bildirirler.<\/p>\n

Bilirki\u015filere y\u00f6netmelikteki esaslara g\u00f6re Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulu, adli t\u0131p ihtisas kurulu ve adli t\u0131p ihtisas dairesi ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131nca yapt\u0131klar\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaya uygun \u00fccret takdir olunur.<\/p>\n

II- a ) Adli T\u0131p Genel Kurulu, adli t\u0131p ihtisas kurullar\u0131 ile adli t\u0131p ihtisas daireleri, inceledikleri konularla ilgili olarak kendi kurul veya dairelerinde bulunmayan, Adli T\u0131p Kurumundaki di\u011fer kurul veya dairelerde bulunan uzmanlar\u0131n davet edilmesine karar verebilirler. Uzman ki\u015filer, o olayla ilgili toplant\u0131ya kat\u0131l\u0131r ve oy kullan\u0131rlar\u2026” h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc i\u00e7ermektedir.<\/p>\n

Bu d\u00fczenlemelere g\u00f6re, an\u0131lan Kanunun 7. maddesinin ( f ) bendi uyar\u0131nca, Adli T\u0131p Kurumu 6. \u0130htisas Kurulunun, bir ba\u015fkan ve adli t\u0131p uzman\u0131 iki \u00fcye ile birer kad\u0131n hastal\u0131klar\u0131 ve do\u011fum, radyoloji, \u00fcroloji, ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hastal\u0131klar\u0131, \u00e7ocuk psikiyatrisi, adli antropoloji ve \u00e7ocuk cerrahisi uzman\u0131ndan olu\u015faca\u011f\u0131, ayn\u0131 Kanunun 23. maddesinin ( B ) bendi uyar\u0131nca da ihtisas kurulunun ba\u015fkan ve i\u015fin niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re bu uzmanlardan en az d\u00f6rt \u00fcyenin kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131yla toplanaca\u011f\u0131, ancak incelenecek konunun ilgili uzman \u00fcyenin haz\u0131r bulunmamas\u0131 halinde ise m\u00fczakerenin yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Di\u011fer yandan Kanunun “Di\u011fer Adli Ekspertiz Kurumlar\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 31. maddesi;<\/p>\n

“Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurumlar\u0131 veya birimleri, adli t\u0131p mevzuat\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde adli t\u0131p olaylar\u0131nda ve di\u011fer adli konularda Ceza Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc Kanununa g\u00f6re resmi bilirki\u015fi say\u0131l\u0131r. Bu birim ve kliniklerde tetkik edilecek adli t\u0131p ile ilgili i\u015fler y\u00f6netmelikte belirlenir”,<\/p>\n

\u015eeklinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olup, bu suretle de Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurumlar\u0131 veya birimlerinin, adli t\u0131p mevzuat\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde adli konularda Ceza Yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 Yasas\u0131na g\u00f6re resmi bilirki\u015fi say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Buna g\u00f6re, 2659 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 31. maddesinin a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; yerel mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan su\u00e7 tarihinde 15 ya\u015f\u0131ndan k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck olan cinsel istismar su\u00e7unun ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7 sonucunda ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozulup bozulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair raporun Adli T\u0131p Kurumu yerine 2659 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 31. maddesi uyar\u0131nca Hacettepe \u00dcniversitesi Hastanelerinden al\u0131nmas\u0131nda bir isabetsizlik bulunmamakta ise de; an\u0131lan maddede Y\u00fcksek\u00f6\u011fretim Kurumlar\u0131 veya birimlerinin adli t\u0131p mevzuat\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde g\u00f6rev yapaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, Adli T\u0131p Kurumu 6. \u0130htisas Kurulunda yer almas\u0131 gereken uzmanl\u0131k dallar\u0131nda g\u00f6revli uzmanlar aras\u0131ndan se\u00e7ilecek ve i\u00e7erisinde zorunlu olarak \u00e7ocuk psikiyatrisi bulunan en az be\u015f ki\u015filik bir bilirki\u015fi heyetinden rapor al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekirken, \u00fc\u00e7 ki\u015filik bilirki\u015fi kurulunca d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olan rapor esas al\u0131narak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 isabetsizdir.<\/p>\n

Kald\u0131 ki, 15 ya\u015f\u0131ndan k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck olan cinsel istismar su\u00e7unun ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7 sonucunda ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozulup bozulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair raporun Adli T\u0131p Kurumundan al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 halinde 6. \u0130htisas Kurulu Ba\u015fkan\u0131 ile i\u00e7erisinde zorunlu olarak \u00e7ocuk psikiyatrisi de bulunan en az d\u00f6rt \u00fcyenin kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 ile olu\u015facak be\u015f ki\u015filik bir kurul taraf\u0131ndan raporun d\u00fczenlenmesi zorunlulu\u011fu bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu itibarla yerel mahkemenin, yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f i\u00e7erik olarak yetersiz tan\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de eksik olan bir raporu h\u00fckm\u00fcne esas almak suretiyle san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda su\u00e7 nitelemesi ve mahkumiyet karar\u0131 vermesi isabetsiz olup, usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olan direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bu y\u00f6nden BOZULMASINA karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

2- ) Soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda dinlenen ve i\u015flenen su\u00e7un etkisiyle psikolojisi bozulan \u00e7ocuk veya ma\u011fdurun yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda tekrar dinlenmesinin gerekip gerekmedi\u011finin belirlenmesine dair uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n incelenmesine gelince;<\/p>\n

C.M.K.n\u0131n “Tan\u0131klar\u0131n dinlenmesi” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 52. maddesi,<\/p>\n

” ( 1 ) Her tan\u0131k, ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 ve sonraki tan\u0131klar yan\u0131nda bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n dinlenir.<\/p>\n

( 2 ) Tan\u0131klar, kovu\u015fturma evresine kadar ancak gecikmesinde sak\u0131nca bulunan veya kimli\u011fin belirlenmesine dair hallerde birbirleri ile ve \u015f\u00fcpheli ile y\u00fczle\u015ftirilebilirler.<\/p>\n

( 3 ) Tan\u0131klar\u0131n dinlenmesi s\u0131ras\u0131ndaki g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc veya sesler kayda al\u0131nabilir.<\/p>\n

Ancak;<\/p>\n

a- ) Ma\u011fdur \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n,<\/p>\n

b- ) Duru\u015fmaya getirilmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmayan ve tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131 madd\u00ee ger\u00e7e\u011fin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan zorunlu olan ki\u015filerin,<\/p>\n

Tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda bu kay\u0131t zorunludur.<\/p>\n

( 4 ) \u00dc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kra h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn uygulanmas\u0131 suretiyle elde edilen ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc kay\u0131tlar\u0131, sadece ceza muhakemesinde kullan\u0131l\u0131r” \u015feklinde,<\/p>\n

C.M.K.n\u0131n “Ma\u011fdur ve \u015fikayet\u00e7inin dinlenmesi” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 236. maddesi ise;<\/p>\n

” ( 1 ) Ma\u011fdurun tan\u0131k olarak dinlenmesi halinde, yemin hari\u00e7, tan\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa dair h\u00fck\u00fcmler uygulan\u0131r.<\/p>\n

( 2 ) \u0130\u015flenen su\u00e7un etkisiyle psikolojisi bozulmu\u015f \u00e7ocuk veya ma\u011fdur, bu su\u00e7a dair soru\u015fturma veya kovu\u015fturmada tan\u0131k olarak bir defa dinlenebilir. Madd\u00ee ger\u00e7e\u011fin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan zorunluluk arz eden haller sakl\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

( 3 ) Ma\u011fdur \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n veya i\u015flenen su\u00e7un etkisiyle psikolojisi bozulmu\u015f olan di\u011fer ma\u011fdurun tan\u0131k olarak dinlenmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda psikoloji, psikiyatri, t\u0131p veya e\u011fitim alan\u0131nda uzman bir ki\u015fi bulundurulur. Bunlar hakk\u0131nda bilirki\u015filere dair h\u00fck\u00fcmler uygulan\u0131r” bi\u00e7iminde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Maddenin 2 ve 3. f\u0131kralar\u0131 TBMM Adalet Komisyonunda eklenmi\u015f olup, Komisyon raporunda ma\u011fduru korumaya y\u00f6nelik olarak bu d\u00fczenlemenin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

Bu d\u00fczenlemenin amac\u0131 su\u00e7un ma\u011fduru konumundaki psikolojisi bozulmu\u015f \u00e7ocuk ve ki\u015fileri korumakt\u0131r. Kural olarak ifadesine ba\u015fvurulan ki\u015filerin gerek soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda gerekse yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda birden \u00e7ok dinlenmeleri konusunda s\u0131n\u0131rlama bulunmamakta ise de, bu genel uygulama psikolojisi bozulmu\u015f \u00e7ocuk veya ma\u011fdurun muhatap oldu\u011fu olay\u0131 defalarca anlatmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furmaktad\u0131r ki her defas\u0131nda ki\u015fiye olay\u0131 tekrar ya\u015fatan bu ifade alma i\u015flemlerinin ki\u015fide \u00f6nemli bir stres ve ac\u0131 kayna\u011f\u0131 olu\u015fturdu\u011fu tart\u0131\u015fmas\u0131zd\u0131r. Bu sebeple i\u015flenen su\u00e7un etkisiyle psikolojisi bozulmu\u015f \u00e7ocuk veya ma\u011fdurun maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan zorunluluk arz eden haller hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere soru\u015fturma veya kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda ancak bir defa dinlenmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

Yasa koyucunun i\u015flenen su\u00e7 sebebiyle psikolojisi bozulmu\u015f \u00e7ocuk ve ma\u011fduru koruma amac\u0131n\u0131n adli y\u00f6nden ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilebilmesi i\u00e7in, bu ki\u015filerin yap\u0131lacak soru\u015fturma sonucunda su\u00e7un nitelendirmesini de yapacak olan C.savc\u0131s\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan dinlenmesi gerekmektedir. C.savc\u0131s\u0131, C.M.K.n\u0131n 236. maddesine uygun \u015fekilde uzman ki\u015finin kat\u0131l\u0131m\u0131 ile ma\u011fdurlar\u0131 dinlemeli, ifade alma i\u015fleminin ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fc olarak kayd\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu uygulama ile i\u015flenen su\u00e7 sebebiyle psikolojisi bozulmu\u015f \u00e7ocuk veya ma\u011fdurun soru\u015fturma veya kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda birden fazla dinlenmesinin ve adli s\u00fcre\u00e7ten olumsuz etkilenmesinin \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ilebilecektir.<\/p>\n

Bununla birlikte, soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nan ma\u011fdure anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na dair tutanaklar\u0131n mahkemece duru\u015fmada okunmamas\u0131n\u0131n yarg\u0131lama yasas\u0131 kurallar\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan da ele al\u0131n\u0131p de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

Bu konuya dair olarak 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.n\u0131n “Duru\u015fmada Okunmas\u0131 Zorunlu Belge ve Tutanaklar” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 209\/1. maddesinde;<\/p>\n

“Naip veya istinabe yoluyla sorgusu yap\u0131lan san\u0131\u011fa ait sorgu tutanaklar\u0131, naip veya istinabe yoluyla dinlenen tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ifade tutanaklar\u0131 ile muayene ve ke\u015fif tutanaklar\u0131 gibi delil olarak kullan\u0131lacak belgeler ve di\u011fer yaz\u0131lar, adl\u00ee sicil \u00f6zetleri ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ki\u015fisel ve ekonomik durumuna dair bilgilerin yer ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 belgeler, duru\u015fmada okunur”,<\/p>\n

“Delilleri Takdir Yetkisi” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 217\/1. maddesinde;<\/p>\n

“Hakim, karar\u0131n\u0131 ancak duru\u015fmaya getirilmi\u015f ve huzurunda tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f delillere dayand\u0131rabilir. Bu deliller hakimin vicdan\u00ee kanaatiyle serbest\u00e7e takdir edilir” \u015feklinde d\u00fczenlemeler yer almaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

Bu bilgiler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

Yerel Mahkemece, soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda dinlenilmi\u015f olan ma\u011fdurelerin bir kez dinlenilmesi ile yetinilerek, kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda yeniden dinlenilmemesi 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.n\u0131n 236\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca usul ve yasaya uygun ve isabetli ise de; soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda dinlenilen ma\u011fdurelerin anlat\u0131mlar\u0131na dair tutanaklar\u0131n duru\u015fmada okunarak, taraflardan diyecekleri sorulmadan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 suretiyle, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n do\u011frudan do\u011fruyal\u0131k, y\u00fcz y\u00fczelik ve s\u00f6zl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, yerel mahkeme direnme h\u00fckm\u00fc bu y\u00f6nden de yerinde de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

Bu itibarla, yerel mahkeme direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn ma\u011fdurelerin ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n BOZULMASINA dair iki adli t\u0131p uzman\u0131, bir \u00e7ocuk ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hastal\u0131klar\u0131 uzman\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen raporun h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve ma\u011fdurelerin soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda al\u0131nan beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n duru\u015fmada okunmamas\u0131 isabetsizliklerinden BOZULMASINA karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7 : <\/b>A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle,<\/p>\n

1- ) Ankara 10. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince 2.6.2011 g\u00fcn ve 132-211 Say\u0131l\u0131 direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n

2- ) Dosyan\u0131n mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay C.Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na tevdiine, 14.02.2012 g\u00fcn\u00fc yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

2. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2014\/4078<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2014\/7292<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 18.3.2014<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

DAVA : <\/b>Dosya incelenerek gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n

KARAR : <\/b>07.02.2005 olan su\u00e7 tarihinin gerek\u00e7eli karar ba\u015fl\u0131\u011f\u0131nda do\u011fru yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen 14.02.2006 tarihli iddianamede su\u00e7 tarihinin 25.07.2003 olarak hatal\u0131 yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 sonuca etkili g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f, tebli\u011fnamedeki bu hususa dair bozma d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesine kat\u0131l\u0131nmam\u0131\u015f, dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131 yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir. Ancak;<\/p>\n

I-5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun 7\/2 ve 5252 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 9\/3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca san\u0131k yarar\u0131na olan h\u00fckm\u00fcn \u00f6nceki ve sonraki kanunlar\u0131n ilgili b\u00fct\u00fcn h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin olaya uygulanarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kacak sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n birbiriyle kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle bulunaca\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetilip, 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun 141 ve 142. maddelerinde tan\u0131mlanan h\u0131rs\u0131zl\u0131k su\u00e7u ile 765 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun 493\/1. maddesinde yer alan su\u00e7un \u00f6gelerinin farkl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n gece vakti say\u0131lan zaman dilimi i\u00e7erisinde ma\u011fdura ait i\u015f yerinin kepenk kilidini k\u0131rarak kalk\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 eyleminin 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun142\/1-b, 143, 35 maddesinde belirtilen h\u0131rs\u0131zl\u0131k su\u00e7u yan\u0131nda, ayn\u0131 Kanunun 116\/2-4, 35 maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen geceleyin i\u015f yeri dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozmak ve 151\/1. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen mala zarar verme su\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 da olu\u015fturaca\u011f\u0131, ancak; 5560 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasan\u0131n 6. maddesi ile 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun 142. maddesine eklenen 4. f\u0131kran\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fck tarihi olan 06.12.2006 g\u00fcn\u00fcnden \u00f6nce i\u015flenen mala zarar vermek su\u00e7unun soru\u015fturma ve kovu\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n \u015fikayete tabi olup, eylemin ma\u011fdurunun 21.03.2008 tarihli oturumda san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda \u015fikayet\u00e7i olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmesi, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n da 07.04.2008 g\u00fcnl\u00fc oturumda ma\u011fdurun \u015fikayetten vazge\u00e7me beyan\u0131n\u0131 kabul etmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda mala zarar vermek su\u00e7undan uygulama yap\u0131l\u0131p h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck karar\u0131 verilemeyece\u011fi ve su\u00e7 tarihi itibariyle geceleyin i\u015flenen i\u015f yeri dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozmak su\u00e7unun uzla\u015fma kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011fu da g\u00f6zetilerek 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK.nun 253 ve 254. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca i\u015f yeri dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozmak su\u00e7undan uzla\u015ft\u0131rma i\u015flemleri yap\u0131l\u0131p, i\u015f yeri dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozmak su\u00e7undan uzla\u015fman\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131 halinde, 765 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun s\u0131ras\u0131yla 493\/1, 62\/1, 81 maddeleri ve 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun s\u0131ras\u0131yla 142\/1-b, 143\/1, 35 maddeleri uyar\u0131nca her iki Yasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re verilecek sonu\u00e7 ceza miktarlar\u0131 belirlenip, sonu\u00e7 ceza miktarlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131larak lehe olan Yasa h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine g\u00f6re uygulama yap\u0131l\u0131p karar verilmesi, uzla\u015fman\u0131n sa\u011flanamamas\u0131 halinde ise denetime olanakl\u0131 olacak bi\u00e7imde 765 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun s\u0131ras\u0131yla 493\/1, 62\/1, 81 maddeleri ile 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun s\u0131ras\u0131yla 142\/1-b, 143\/1, 35, 116\/2-4, 35 maddeleri uyar\u0131nca verilmesi gereken cezalar her iki Yasa i\u00e7in ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 tespit edilip, sonu\u00e7 cezalar kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131r\u0131larak lehe olan yasa belirlenerek uygulama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken, eksik inceleme ve hatal\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme sonucu yaz\u0131l\u0131 bi\u00e7imde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

Kabule g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n

II-14.02.2006 tarihli iddianamede san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda tekerr\u00fcre dair 765 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun 81. maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131n istenmemesi ve yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada san\u0131\u011f\u0131n adli sicil kayd\u0131 ve tekerr\u00fcre esas \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn y\u00fcz\u00fcne okunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK.nun 226.maddesi gere\u011fince ek savunma hakk\u0131 verilmeden, san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda 765 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun81. maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131 ve ayn\u0131 neviden su\u00e7tan m\u00fckerrir oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esi ile san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda 765 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK.nun 522. maddesinin lehe h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin uygulanmamas\u0131,<\/p>\n

SONU\u00c7 :<\/strong> Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f, O Yer Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu sebeplerden dolay\u0131 istem gibi BOZULMASINA, 18.03.2014 tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

6. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

E. 2013\/5289<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

K. 2013\/14964<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

T. 25.6.2013<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  • N\u0130TEL\u0130KL\u0130 HIRSIZLIK ( San\u0131klar\u0131n Ba\u015fka Su\u00e7tan Tutuklu Kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 – Duru\u015fmadan Ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k Tutulmas\u0131 Karar\u0131 Verilmedi\u011fi\/Karar Duru\u015fmas\u0131na Getirtilmemeleri ve M\u00fctalaan\u0131n Y\u00fczlerine Kar\u015f\u0131 Okunmamas\u0131n\u0131n Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu )<\/li>\n
  • SANIKLARIN BA\u015eKA SU\u00c7TAN TUTUKLU BULUNMASI<\/span> ( Duru\u015fmadan Ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k Tutulmas\u0131 Karar\u0131 Verilmedi\u011fi – Karar Duru\u015fmas\u0131na Getirtilmemeleri ve M\u00fctalaan\u0131n Y\u00fczlerine Kar\u015f\u0131\u00a0Okunmamas\u0131n\u0131n Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu )<\/li>\n
  • \u0130DD\u0130A MAKAMININ M\u00dcTALAASININ Y\u00dcZE KAR\u015eI OKUNMAMASI<\/span> ( San\u0131klar\u0131n Ba\u015fka Su\u00e7tan Tutuklu Kald\u0131\u011f\u0131\/Duru\u015fmadan Ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k Tutulmas\u0131 Karar\u0131 Verilmedi\u011fi – Duru\u015fmaya Getirtilerek M\u00fctalaan\u0131n Y\u00fcze Kar\u015f\u0131 Okunmas\u0131 Gerekti\u011fi )5237\/m.142 5271\/m.188, 196<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

    \u00d6ZET : <\/b>Nitelikli h\u0131rs\u0131zl\u0131k su\u00e7u nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131nda; san\u0131klar\u0131n bu su\u00e7tan tahliye edildiklerinin ancak ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu olmalar\u0131 sebebiyle cezaevinde kalmaya devam ettiklerinin bildirilmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda; haklar\u0131nda duru\u015fmalardan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmalar\u0131na da karar verilmeyen san\u0131klar\u0131n karar duru\u015fmas\u0131na getirtilmedi\u011fi ve iddia makam\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fctalaas\u0131n\u0131n y\u00fczlerine kar\u015f\u0131 okunmamas\u0131 hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    DAVA :<\/strong> Yerel Mahkemece verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm temyiz edilmekle; ba\u015fvurunun nitelik, ceza t\u00fcr\u00fc, s\u00fcresi ve su\u00e7 tarihine g\u00f6re dosya g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n

    KARAR : <\/b>San\u0131klar\u0131n bu su\u00e7tan tutuklu olduklar\u0131, 11.11.2010 tarihli celsede tahliyelerine karar verildi\u011fi, Konya E Tipi Kapal\u0131 Ceza \u0130nfaz Kurumunun ayn\u0131 tarihli yaz\u0131s\u0131na g\u00f6re; san\u0131klar\u0131n bu su\u00e7tan tahliye edildiklerinin ancak ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu olmalar\u0131 sebebiyle cezaevinde kalmaya devam ettiklerinin bildirilmesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda; haklar\u0131nda duru\u015fmalardan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmalar\u0131na da karar verilmeyen san\u0131klar\u0131n karar duru\u015fmas\u0131na getirtilmedi\u011fi ve iddia makam\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fctalaas\u0131n\u0131n y\u00fczlerine kar\u015f\u0131 okunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmakla 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’n\u0131n 188. ve 196. maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak savunma haklar\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : <\/b>Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f, san\u0131klar S. T. ve N. K.’\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeyen h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanan sebeple istem gibi BOZULMASINA, 25.06.2013 tarihinde oybirli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/p>\n

    E. 2003\/4-169<\/span><\/p>\n

    K. 2003\/178<\/span><\/p>\n

    T. 3.6.2003<\/span><\/p>\n

    \u2022 H\u00dcKM\u00dcN SANI\u011eIN Y\u00dcZ\u00dcNE KAR\u015eI OKUNMASI<\/span> ( Temyiz S\u00fcresinin Bu Tarihte Ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 TEMY\u0130Z S\u00dcRES\u0130 ( H\u00fck\u00fcm San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Y\u00fcz\u00fcne Kar\u015f\u0131 Verilmesi – S\u00fcresinin Bu Tarihte Ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131\/Vekile Yap\u0131lan Tebligat\u0131n Yeni Bir S\u00fcre Ba\u015flatmayaca\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 TEBL\u0130GAT ( H\u00fck\u00fcm San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Y\u00fcz\u00fcne Kar\u015f\u0131 Verilmi\u015fse Temyiz S\u00fcresinin Bu Tarihte Ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131 – Vekile Yap\u0131lan Tebligat\u0131n Yeni Bir S\u00fcre Ba\u015flatmayaca\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 TEFH\u0130M ( San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Y\u00fcz\u00fcne Kar\u015f\u0131 – Temyiz S\u00fcresinin Bu Tarihte Ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131 ) 1412\/m. 310, 315<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ZET : <\/b>H\u00fck\u00fcm san\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcz<\/b>\u00fcne tefhim edilmi\u015ftir. H\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhimi ile temyiz s\u00fcresi ba\u015flar. H\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa tefhimine ra\u011fmen gerekmedi\u011fi halde vekile yap\u0131lan tebligat yeni bir temyizs\u00fcresi ba\u015flatmaz ve herhangi bir hak do\u011furmaz. San\u0131k vekilinin temyiz s\u00fcresinden sonra verdi\u011fi temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin reddi gerekir.<\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>G\u00f6revliye etkin direnme su\u00e7undan san\u0131k Osman’\u0131n TCY’n\u0131n 258\/1 ve 647 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasan\u0131n 4. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 547.560.000 lira a\u011f\u0131r para cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin Saray\u00f6n\u00fc Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinden verilen 12.7.2000 g\u00fcn ve 34-64 say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcm san\u0131k vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmekle dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 4. Ceza Dairesinin 18.2.2002 g\u00fcn ve 2002\/109-2287 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “San\u0131k m\u00fcdafiinin 12.7.2000 tarihli dilek\u00e7esinde yarara olan h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin uygulanmas\u0131 yolundaki iste\u011finin 647 Say\u0131l\u0131 Yasan\u0131n 5. maddesini de kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetilerek bu konuda bir karar verilmesi gerekti\u011finin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmemesi” isabetsizli\u011finden bozulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkeme 21.5.2002 g\u00fcn ve 30-45 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “San\u0131k vekilince san\u0131\u011fa verilecek cezan\u0131n paraya \u00e7evrilerek ertelenmesi talep edilmi\u015f, taksitlendirme konusunda bir istemde bulunulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkememizce san\u0131k vekilinin talepleri dikkate al\u0131narak paraya \u00e7evirme ve erteleme konusunda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmu\u015f, talep olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ve gerekli g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden taksitlendirme konusunda h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.” gerek\u00e7esiyle \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k vekilinin 4.6.2002 g\u00fcnl\u00fc temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin, yerel mahkemece 12.6.2002 g\u00fcn ve 30-45 say\u0131l\u0131 ek karar ile; temyiz ba\u015fvurusunun s\u00fcresinden sonra yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esi ile reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k vekili taraf\u0131ndan bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 da temyiz yoluna ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine dava dosyas\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay C. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n “ek karar\u0131n onanmas\u0131” istekli 15.5.2003 g\u00fcnl\u00fc tebli\u011fnamesiyle Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011fa g\u00f6nderilmekle, Ceza Genel Kurulunca okundu, gere\u011fi konu\u015fulup d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n

    KARAR :<\/strong> G\u00f6revliye etkin direnme su\u00e7undan mahkumiyete ili\u015fkin direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn 21.5.2002 g\u00fcnl\u00fc oturumda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcz\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 tefhim edildi\u011fi, gerekmedi\u011fi halde ayr\u0131ca vekiline yap\u0131lan tebligat\u0131n yeni bir s\u00fcre ba\u015flatmayaca\u011f\u0131 ve herhangi bir hak do\u011furmayaca\u011f\u0131 cihetle, san\u0131k vekilinin s\u00fcresinden sonra verdi\u011fi 4.6.2002 g\u00fcnl\u00fc temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin reddine ili\u015fkin yerel mahkeme karar\u0131 isabetli bulundu\u011fundan, san\u0131k vekilinin bu karara y\u00f6nelik itiraz\u0131n\u0131n reddiyle yerel mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n onanmas\u0131na karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 :<\/strong> A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, san\u0131k vekilinin itiraz\u0131n\u0131n REDD\u0130NE, temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin reddine ili\u015fkin yerel mahkemece verilen 12.6.2002 g\u00fcn ve 30-45 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n ONANMASINA, 3.6.2003 g\u00fcn\u00fc tebli\u011fnamedeki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceye uygun olarak oybirli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    \n

    T.C.<\/span>
    \nYarg\u0131tay<\/span>
    \nCeza Genel Kurulu<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    Esas No:2012\/1533<\/span>
    \nKarar No:2013\/113<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n

    \u00c7ocu\u011fun cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan san\u0131k Erol ‘un 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK\u2019nun 103\/1-a, 103\/2, 103\/6, 62, 53 ve 63. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 12 y\u0131l 6 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, hak yoksunlu\u011funa ve mahsuba, san\u0131k Cengiz ‘in ise ayn\u0131 kanunun 103\/1-a, 103\/2, 103\/6, 31\/3, 62 ve 63. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 8 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve mahsuba ili\u015fkin, \u00c7ar\u015famba A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 25.03.2011 g\u00fcn ve 99-63 say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn, san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 14. Ceza Dairesince 13.02.2012 g\u00fcn ve 20273-1463 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    \u201c…Yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen sair temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddine, Ancak;<\/p>\n

    CMK’nun 218\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca ancak uygulanacak ceza h\u00fck\u00fcmlerini etkilemesi durumunda ma\u011fdurun ya\u015f\u0131yla ilgili karar verilebilece\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden, su\u00e7 vasf\u0131na ve ceza h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine etkisi olmayacak \u015fekilde ma\u011fdurenin ya\u015f\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczeltilmesine karar verilmesi,<\/p>\n

    07.08.2007 g\u00fcnl\u00fc duru\u015fma ara karar\u0131 uyar\u0131nca 25.01.2010 g\u00fcnl\u00fc Adli T\u0131p Kurumuna yaz\u0131lan yaz\u0131da ma\u011fdure Hasret ‘in 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 103\/6. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda beden ve ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozulup bozulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bozulmu\u015f ise hangi san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemi sonucu bozuldu\u011funun sorulmu\u015f bulunmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n Adli T\u0131p Kurumu 6. \u0130htisas Kurulunca 10.12.2010 g\u00fcn\u00fc d\u00fczenlenen raporu bu konuda a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi gibi mahkemece de bu hususun irdelenmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemleri aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre de g\u00f6zetilerek ma\u011fdurenin ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndaki bozulman\u0131n her iki san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemleri sonucu mu yoksa bu san\u0131klardan birinin eylemi sonucu mu olu\u015ftu\u011funun teredd\u00fcte mahal b\u0131rakmayacak \u015fekilde tespitinin t\u0131bben m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, Adli T\u0131p Kurumundan sorulup belirlenerek san\u0131klar\u0131n hukuki durumlar\u0131n\u0131n tayin ve tespiti gerekirken bu konuda a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k i\u00e7ermeyen rapora dayan\u0131larak eksik soru\u015fturmayla yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131\u201d isabetsizli\u011finden bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkeme ise 13.06.2012 g\u00fcn ve 102-139 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    \u201cSan\u0131klar Erol ve Cengiz ‘in arkada\u015f olduklar\u0131, san\u0131k Erol’un Terme \u0130l\u00e7esi K\u00f6ybuca\u011f\u0131 K\u00f6y\u00fc’nde oturdu\u011fu, su\u00e7 tarihinde 18 ya\u015f\u0131ndan k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck olan san\u0131k Cengiz ‘in ise Terme \u0130l\u00e7esi Akbucak K\u00f6y\u00fc’nde oturdu\u011fu, olay tarihi olan 27.04.2007 g\u00fcn\u00fc Terme il\u00e7e merkezinde her iki san\u0131k birlikte dola\u015f\u0131rken, olay tarihinde 14 ya\u015f\u0131nda olan ve 25.12.1993 tarihinde do\u011fdu\u011fu kabul edilen ma\u011fdure Hasret ile parkta kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 ve tan\u0131\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131, ma\u011fdurenin donuk zeka d\u00fczeyinde oldu\u011fu, san\u0131klar ve ma\u011fdurenin birlikte Terme \u0130l\u00e7esi Cumhuriyet Mahallesi B\u00fclb\u00fcl Sokak \u00fczerinde bulunan \u015e\u00fckr\u00fc isimli \u015fahsa ait f\u0131nd\u0131k bah\u00e7esine geldikleri, f\u0131nd\u0131k bah\u00e7esinde san\u0131klar\u0131n ma\u011fdureyi cinsel ili\u015fki i\u00e7in ikna ettikleri, \u00f6nce san\u0131k Cengiz’in ma\u011fdureye arkadan organ sokarak fiili livata suretiyle cinsel istismarda bulundu\u011fu, bir s\u00fcre sonra di\u011fer san\u0131k Erol ‘un de ayn\u0131 f\u0131nd\u0131k bah\u00e7esinde bu kez ma\u011fdurenin cinsel organ\u0131na kendi cinsel organ\u0131n\u0131 sokmak suretiyle cinsel istismarda bulundu\u011fu, olaydan bir g\u00fcn sonra ma\u011fdurenin her iki san\u0131\u011f\u0131 da polis merkezinde te\u015fhis etti\u011fi, olay\u0131n bu \u015fekilde geli\u015fti\u011fi, olu\u015fun b\u00f6yle oldu\u011fu mahkememizce kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Her ne kadar ma\u011fdurenin ya\u015f\u0131, Samsun Mehmet Ayd\u0131n Devlet Hastanesi Sa\u011fl\u0131k Kurulu’nun 05.09.2007 tarihli raporu ile rapor tarihi itibari ile 16 ya\u015f\u0131nda oldu\u011funa dair bir belirleme yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de; bu konudaki en yetkin kurum olan ATK 6. \u0130htisas Kurulu’nun 16 Eyl\u00fcl 2009 tarihindeki raporuna g\u00f6re; olay tarihi olan 27.04.2007 tarihinde 16 ya\u015f i\u00e7inde bulunma ile uyumlu geli\u015fim g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi belirlense bile kesin ya\u015f tespitinin yap\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair rapor verildi\u011fi, daha sonra ise ma\u011fdurenin annesinin ger\u00e7ekte OM\u00dc T\u0131p Fak\u00fcltesi’nde 25.12.1993 tarihinde bir k\u0131z \u00e7ocuk d\u00fcnyaya getirdi\u011finin OM\u00dc’n\u00fcn yaz\u0131s\u0131yla belirlendi\u011fi, bu bilgilerin n\u00fcfus kay\u0131tlar\u0131 ile \u00e7eli\u015fmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmakla, resmi kayda \u00fcst\u00fcnl\u00fck tan\u0131narak ma\u011fdurenin ger\u00e7ekte su\u00e7 tarihinde 14 ya\u015f i\u00e7erisinde oldu\u011fu ve ger\u00e7ek Do\u011fum tarihinin 25.12.1993 tarihi oldu\u011fu sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclerek, n\u00fcfus kayd\u0131n\u0131n buna g\u00f6re d\u00fczeltilmesi yoluna gidilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    27.04.2007 tarihli Terme Devlet Hastanesi’nden verilen adli rapora g\u00f6re; ma\u011fdurenin sa\u011f \u00f6n kol alt k\u0131sm\u0131nda hiperemik alan ve sa\u011f a\u015f\u0131l tendonu \u00fczerinde hiperemik alan mevcut oldu\u011fu belirlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    27.04.2007 tarihli cinsel sald\u0131r\u0131 muayene raporuna g\u00f6re; ma\u011fdurenin genital muayenesinde, ma\u011fdurenin k\u0131zl\u0131k zar\u0131nda tamamen iyile\u015fmi\u015f olmas\u0131 aylar \u00f6ncesini d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fcren kaideye varan derin y\u0131rt\u0131k oldu\u011fu, vajen arka duvar\u0131nda saat 06.00 hizas\u0131nda taze kanamal\u0131 laserasyon mevcut oldu\u011fu, aktif kanaman\u0131n olay\u0131n 24 saat i\u00e7erisinde oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bildirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    27.04.2007 tarihli genel cerrahi uzman\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen cinsel sald\u0131r\u0131 muayene raporunda; ma\u011fdurenin perianal b\u00f6lgesinde halka tarz\u0131 ekimoz ve anal sfinkter tonusunun azalmas\u0131n\u0131n fiili livata bulgusu y\u00f6n\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu belirlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130stanbul ATK 6. \u0130htisas Kurulu’nun 10 Aral\u0131k 2010 tarihli raporuna g\u00f6re; ma\u011fdurenin olay nedeniyle travma sonras\u0131 stres bozuklu\u011fu ya\u015fad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011funa dair rapor verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Ma\u011fdurenin soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131ndaki anlat\u0131m\u0131, su\u00e7un i\u015flendi\u011fi f\u0131nd\u0131k tarlas\u0131ndaki kolluk taraf\u0131ndan belirlenen yer ve oradaki bulgular, san\u0131klar\u0131n k\u0131smi ikrar yollu savunmalar\u0131, kad\u0131n do\u011fum uzman\u0131 ve genel cerrahi uzmanlar\u0131nca verilen raporlar, kad\u0131n do\u011fum uzman\u0131 bilirki\u015finin mahkememizce al\u0131nan beyan\u0131 g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, san\u0131klardan Cengiz’in ma\u011fdurenin anal b\u00f6lgesinden organ sokmak suretiyle ve di\u011fer san\u0131k Erol’un ise ma\u011fdurenin cinsel organ\u0131na kendi cinsel organ\u0131n\u0131 sokmak suretiyle su\u00e7 tarihinde 15 ya\u015f\u0131ndan k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck olan ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7unu i\u015fledikleri sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f, bu hususta akli ve vicdani kanaate var\u0131larak, san\u0131klar\u0131n cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 yoluna gidilmi\u015f, ma\u011fdurenin ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n olay nedeniyle bozulmu\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle cezada art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, san\u0131k Cengiz ‘in su\u00e7 tarihinde 15-18 ya\u015f grubu i\u00e7erisinde olmas\u0131 nedeniyle cezas\u0131nda indirim yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r…\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu h\u00fckm\u00fcn de san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine, Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n \u201ctemyiz talebinin s\u00fcresinde olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle reddi\u201d istekli 10.12.2012 g\u00fcn ve 273030 say\u0131l\u0131 tebli\u011fnamesi ile Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    T\u00dcRK M\u0130LLET\u0130 ADINA<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU KARARI<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u00d6zel Daire ile yerel mahkeme aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k, su\u00e7 tarihinde her iki san\u0131\u011f\u0131n nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131na maruz kalan ma\u011fdurenin Adli T\u0131p Kurumu taraf\u0131ndan ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011fu y\u00f6n\u00fcnde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f bildirilen olayda, san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemleri aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre de g\u00f6zetilerek ma\u011fdurenin ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndaki bozulman\u0131n her iki san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemleri sonucu mu, yoksa bu san\u0131klardan birinin eylemi sonucu mu olu\u015ftu\u011funun teredd\u00fcte mahal b\u0131rakmayacak \u015fekilde tespitinin t\u0131bben m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n Adli T\u0131p Kurumundan sorulup belirlenmesine gerek olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin ise de;<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ncelikle direnme karar\u0131ndaki kanun yolu bildiriminin yasal ve yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile buna ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafiinin temyizinin s\u00fcresinde yap\u0131l\u0131p yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7 Y\u00f6netmeli\u011finin 27. maddesi uyar\u0131nca \u00f6n sorun olarak ele al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130ncelenen dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n

    San\u0131klar ve m\u00fcdafii ile ma\u011fdure vekilinin haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu 13.06.2012 tarihli oturumda yerel mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan direnme karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkemece; \u201cMahkememizin 2007\/99 Esas 2011\/63 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ve 25.03.2011 tarihli karar\u0131nda ve a\u015fa\u011f\u0131da yer alan h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnilmesine,<\/p>\n

    Dosyan\u0131n bu nedenle Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulunda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilmesine\u201d \u015feklindeki ifadeler tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irildikten sonra her iki san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda da mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc kuruldu\u011fu,<\/p>\n

    Kanun yolu bildiriminin de aynen; \u201csu\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocuk ve san\u0131k ile m\u00fcdafilerinin ve ma\u011fdure vekilinin y\u00fcz\u00fcnde, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n huzurunda ve talebe uygun olarak, karar\u0131n okunmas\u0131ndan ya da tebli\u011finden itibaren 7 g\u00fcn i\u00e7erisinde mahkememize verilecek bir dilek\u00e7e ile ya da mahkeme kalemine ba\u015fvuru \u00fczerine tutturulacak bir tutanak ile Yarg\u0131tay’da temyiz yolu a\u00e7\u0131k olmak \u00fczere\u201d \u015feklinde oldu\u011fu,<\/p>\n

    H\u00fckme kar\u015f\u0131 herhangi bir temyiz ba\u015fvurusu yap\u0131lmadan yerel mahkemece dosyan\u0131n do\u011frudan g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nca 24.09.2012 tarihli bir yaz\u0131 ile; h\u00fckm\u00fcn re’sen temyize tabi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve herhangi bir temyiz talebinin dosyada bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle, mevcut oldu\u011fu takdirde temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin eklenerek dosyan\u0131n g\u00f6nderilmesi i\u00e7in mahkemeye iade edildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkeme ba\u015fkan\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan imzalanan 12.10.2012 tarihli bir tutanakla, dosyan\u0131n Ceza Genel Kuruluna g\u00f6nderilece\u011finin yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle kanun yolu bildiriminde yan\u0131ltma bulundu\u011fu belirtilerek gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafiine tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

    San\u0131klar m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan da ayn\u0131 tarihli bir dilek\u00e7e ile h\u00fckm\u00fcn temyiz edildi\u011fi, temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde, yan\u0131ltma nedeniyle temyiz ba\u015fvurusunda bulunulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair herhangi bir ifadeye yer verilmedi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

    Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK\u2019nun, 5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8. maddesi uyar\u0131nca halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 310. maddesinde, temyiz isteminin y\u00fcze kar\u015f\u0131 verilen kararlarda h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhiminden itibaren bir hafta i\u00e7inde h\u00fckm\u00fc veren mahkemeye verilecek bir dilek\u00e7e ile veya zab\u0131t k\u00e2tibine yap\u0131lacak beyanla olaca\u011f\u0131, bu takdirde, beyan\u0131n tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irilerek h\u00e2kime tasdik ettirilece\u011fi, yoklukta verilen kararlarda ise temyiz s\u00fcresinin tebli\u011fle ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK\u2019nun 34\/2, 231\/2 ve 232\/6. maddelerinde ise, h\u00fck\u00fcm ve kararlarda, ba\u015fvurulacak kanun yolu, ba\u015fvurunun yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 mercii, y\u00f6ntemi ve ba\u015fvuru s\u00fcresinin hi\u00e7bir teredd\u00fcte yer vermeksizin a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a belirtilece\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine yer verilmi\u015f olup bu h\u00fck\u00fcmlere ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k ayn\u0131 kanunun 40. maddesi uyar\u0131nca eski hale getirme nedeni olu\u015fturacakt\u0131r. Bu bildirimlerdeki temel ama\u00e7 sujelerin ba\u015fvuru haklar\u0131n\u0131 etkin bir bi\u00e7imde kullanmalar\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131, bu eksiklik nedeniyle hak kay\u0131plar\u0131na yol a\u00e7\u0131lmamas\u0131d\u0131r. Ancak burada dikkat edilecek veya eski hale getirme nedeni olu\u015fturacak husus, eksik veya yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 bildirim nedeniyle bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n engellenip engellenmedi\u011finin belirlenmesidir. Bildirimdeki eksikli\u011fin yol a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir hak kayb\u0131 bulunmamakta ise, bu durum eski hale getirme nedeni olu\u015fturmayacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 bir hukuki \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcme kavu\u015fturulabilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ceza muhakemesinde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenen m\u00fcdafiin konumu \u00fczerinde de durulmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 2\/1-c maddesinde m\u00fcdafii; \u015f\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ceza muhakemesinde savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapan avukat olarak tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015f, 1136 say\u0131l\u0131 Avukatl\u0131k Kanununun 1. maddesinde avukatl\u0131\u011f\u0131n bir kamu hizmeti ve serbest meslek oldu\u011fu vurguland\u0131ktan sonra 2. maddesinde ise \u201cAvukatl\u0131\u011f\u0131n Amac\u0131\u201d; \u201cAvukatl\u0131\u011f\u0131n amac\u0131; hukuki m\u00fcnasebetlerin d\u00fczenlenmesini, her t\u00fcrl\u00fc hukuki mesele ve anla\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n adalet ve hakkaniyete uygun olarak \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesini ve hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131n tam olarak uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 her derecede yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131, hakemler, resmi ve \u00f6zel ki\u015fi, kurul ve kurumlar nezdinde sa\u011flamakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Avukat bu ama\u00e7la hukuki bilgi ve tecr\u00fcbelerini adalet hizmetine ve ki\u015filerin yararlanmas\u0131na tahsis eder\u2026\u201d \u015feklinde a\u00e7\u0131klanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Kanunun \u201cAvukat\u0131n Hak ve \u00d6devleri\u201d k\u0131sm\u0131nda yer alan 34. maddesinde; \u201cAvukatlar, y\u00fcklendikleri g\u00f6revleri bu g\u00f6revin kutsall\u0131\u011f\u0131na yak\u0131\u015f\u0131r bir \u015fekilde \u00f6zen, do\u011fruluk ve onur i\u00e7inde yerine getirmek ve avukatl\u0131k unvan\u0131n\u0131n gerektirdi\u011fi sayg\u0131 ve g\u00fcvene uygun bi\u00e7imde davranmak ve T\u00fcrkiye Barolar Birli\u011fince belirlenen meslek kurallar\u0131na uymakla y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcd\u00fcrler\u201d denilmek suretiyle avukatlar\u0131n g\u00f6revlerini yerine getirirken uyacaklar\u0131 y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckler ifade edilmi\u015f,<\/p>\n

    \u201cYaln\u0131z Avukatlar\u0131n Yapabilece\u011fi \u0130\u015fler\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 35. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise; \u201cKanun i\u015flerinde ve hukuki meselelerde m\u00fctalaa vermek, mahkeme, hakem veya yarg\u0131 yetkisini haiz bulunan di\u011fer organlar huzurunda ger\u00e7ek ve t\u00fczel ki\u015filere ait haklar\u0131 dava etmek ve savunmak, adli i\u015flemleri takip etmek, bu i\u015flere ait b\u00fct\u00fcn evrak\u0131 d\u00fczenlemek, yaln\u0131z baroda yaz\u0131l\u0131 avukatlara aittir\u201d \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenlemeyle de mahkeme huzurunda ki\u015filerin savunma g\u00f6revinin yaln\u0131zca avukatlar taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131labilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

    San\u0131klar m\u00fcdafiinin y\u00fcz\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 verilen h\u00fck\u00fcmde ba\u015fvurulacak kanun yoluna ili\u015fkin bildirimde temyizin \u201ckarar\u0131n okunmas\u0131ndan ya da tebli\u011finden itibaren 7 g\u00fcn i\u00e7erisinde\u201d yap\u0131labilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015f, bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda da; \u201cDosyan\u0131n bu nedenle Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulunda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilmesine\u201d ifadelerine yer verilmi\u015ftir. San\u0131klar m\u00fcdafiinin, y\u00fcz\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 verilen bu h\u00fckm\u00fc s\u00fcresinden sonra temyiz etti\u011fi ve temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde bildirimdeki bu ifadeler nedeniyle temyiz s\u00fcresinin ne zaman ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131 veya dosyan\u0131n kendili\u011finden temyize t\u00e2bi oldu\u011fu hususunda bir teredd\u00fct ya\u015fad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin herhangi bir beyan\u0131n yer almad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, temyiz s\u00fcresinden sonra dilek\u00e7enin verilmesine ili\u015fkin herhangi bilginin de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK\u2019nun 310. maddesi uyar\u0131nca, 13.06.2012 g\u00fcn\u00fc y\u00fcze kar\u015f\u0131 verilmi\u015f olan karara y\u00f6nelik temyiz isteminin tefhimden itibaren bir haftal\u0131k s\u00fcre i\u00e7erisinde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmekte olup, san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafii bir haftal\u0131k s\u00fcreden sonra 12.10.2012 g\u00fcn\u00fc temyiz ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur. Her ne kadar kararda ba\u015fvurulacak kanun yoluna ili\u015fkin bildirimde, s\u00fcrenin ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n tefhim ya da tebli\u011f olarak g\u00f6sterilmi\u015f bulunmas\u0131 ve karar\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131na dosyan\u0131n Ceza Genel Kurulunda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmek \u00fczere g\u00f6nderilece\u011fine ili\u015fkin bir ibarenin yaz\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle bildirimin yan\u0131lt\u0131c\u0131 mahiyette oldu\u011fu, bu durumun eski hale getirme nedeni olarak kabul\u00fc ile temyiz ba\u015fvurusunun s\u00fcresinde yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclebilirse de, bu husus san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafii a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bir yan\u0131lg\u0131 olu\u015fturmayaca\u011f\u0131ndan \u201ckanun yolu s\u00fcresinin\u201d i\u015flemeye ba\u015flamas\u0131n\u0131 engellemeyecektir.<\/p>\n

    Zira, mesle\u011fi bir kamu hizmeti niteli\u011findeki avukatl\u0131k olan, san\u0131klar\u0131n savunmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00fcstlenen ve bu ba\u011flamda savunma ve kanun yollar\u0131na ba\u015fvuru i\u00e7in yeterli d\u00fczeyde hukuki bilgiye sahip olan m\u00fcdafiin temyiz s\u00fcresinin, karar\u0131n y\u00fcze kar\u015f\u0131 verildi\u011fi hallerde tefhimden itibaren i\u015flemeye ba\u015flayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve hangi h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin re’sen temyize tabi oldu\u011funu bilmemesi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclemeyece\u011finden, kanun yolu bildirimindeki bu eksiklik m\u00fcdafii a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bir yan\u0131lg\u0131 ve bu ba\u011flamda hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir engel olu\u015fturmayacakt\u0131r. Kald\u0131 ki, san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafii s\u00fcresinden sonra verdi\u011fi temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde, bildirimdeki ifade nedeniyle karar\u0131n kendili\u011finden temyize t\u00e2bi oldu\u011fu veya temyiz s\u00fcresinin ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131 konusunda kendisinin yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir iddias\u0131 da olmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Nitekim Ceza Genel Kurulunun 08.05.2012 g\u00fcn ve 129-182 ile 27.12.2011 g\u00fcn ve 377-301 say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131 ba\u015fta olmak \u00fczere bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda da ayn\u0131 sonuca ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Bu itibarla, san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafiinin kanuni s\u00fcreden sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen temyiz talebinin 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK\u2019nun 5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 310 ve 317. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca reddine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7:<\/strong><\/p>\n

    A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

    1- San\u0131klar m\u00fcdafiinin kanuni s\u00fcreden sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen temyiz talebinin 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK\u2019nun 5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 310 ve 317. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n

    2- Dosyan\u0131n, mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 02.04.2013 g\u00fcn\u00fc yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2014\/14-35<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2016\/49<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 9.2.2016<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \u2022 N\u0130TEL\u0130KL\u0130 C\u0130NSEL \u0130ST\u0130SMAR \/ K\u0130\u015e\u0130Y\u0130 H\u00dcRR\u0130YET\u0130NDEN YOKSUN KILMA SU\u00c7LARI (Bozmadan Sonra Yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n Bozma \u0130lam\u0131na Dair G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc A\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan Sonra Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n Bitirilerek H\u00fckm\u00fcn Tefhim Edildi\u011fi – Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131klara Son S\u00f6zlerinin Verilmemesi 5271 S. C.M.K.’nun 216\/3. Md. Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu)<\/div>\n
    \n

    \u2022 D\u0130RENME KARARI GEREK\u00c7ES\u0130 (Nitelikli Cinsel \u0130stismar ve Ki\u015fiyi H\u00fcrriyetinden Yoksun K\u0131lma – Mahkemece Bozma Karar\u0131na Ni\u00e7in Uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 A\u00e7\u0131klanmadan Kesinle\u015fen Su\u00e7lar\u0131 da Kapsayacak Bi\u00e7imde \u0130lk H\u00fck\u00fcmde G\u00f6sterilenler \u0130le Tamamen Ayn\u0131 Gerek\u00e7eyle Direnme Karar\u0131 Verilmesi Usul ve Kanuna Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu)<\/p>\n

    \u2022 SAVUNMA HAKKININ KISITLANMASI<\/span><\/strong> (Bozmadan Sonra Yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n Bozma \u0130lam\u0131na Dair G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc A\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan Sonra Yarg\u0131lama Bitirilerek H\u00fckm\u00fcn Tefhim Edildi\u011fi – Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131klara Son S\u00f6zlerinin Verilmemesi Bozma Nedeni Oldu\u011fu\/Nitelikli Cinsel \u0130stismar ve Ki\u015fiyi H\u00fcrriyetinden Yoksun K\u0131lma Su\u00e7lar\u0131)<\/p>\n

    \u2022 SANI\u011eA SON S\u00d6Z\u00dcN\u00dcN SORULMASI GERE\u011e\u0130<\/span> <\/strong>(Nitelikli Cinsel \u0130stismar ve Ki\u015fiyi H\u00fcrriyetinden Yoksun K\u0131lma – Bozmadan Sonra Yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n Bozma \u0130lam\u0131na Dair G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc A\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan Sonra Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131klara Son S\u00f6zlerinin Verilmemesi Sebebiyle Direnme Karar\u0131nda \u0130sabet Bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131)<\/p>\n

    5271\/m.216\/3<\/p>\n

    Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7 Y\u00f6netmeli\u011fi\/m.27<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ZET : Dava; nitelikli cinsel istismar ve ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7lar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. Bozmadan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bozma ilam\u0131na dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan sonra yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilerek h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6zlerinin verilmemesi 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fundan, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furan bu usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k sebebiyle yerel mahkeme direnme karar\u0131nda isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Di\u011fer taraftan yerel mahkemece, bozulmakla ortadan kalkan eski h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnilmesine karar verildikten sonra, bozma karar\u0131na ni\u00e7in uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klanmadan kesinle\u015fen su\u00e7lar\u0131 da kapsayacak bi\u00e7imde ilk h\u00fck\u00fcmde g\u00f6sterilenler ile tamamen ayn\u0131 gerek\u00e7eyle direnme karar\u0131 verilmesi de usul ve kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    DAVA : San\u0131k …’un ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 103\/1-b, 103\/2, 103\/6, 43\/1, 62 ve 63. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 14 y\u0131l 2 ay hapis, \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k …’ya y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan ayn\u0131 kanunun 109\/2, 109\/3-b, 62, 53 ve 63. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 3 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, hak yoksunlu\u011funa ve mahsuba, ma\u011fdure … ve \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k …’ya y\u00f6nelik \u015fantaj su\u00e7undan 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 107\/1-2, 43\/2, 62 ve 52. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 1 y\u0131l 6 ay 22 g\u00fcn hapis ve 2.500 Lira adli para cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 231\/5. maddesi uyar\u0131nca h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na, ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan beraatine, ayn\u0131 ma\u011fdureye y\u00f6nelik mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n \u015fik\u00e2yetten vazge\u00e7me sebebiyle d\u00fc\u015fmesine; san\u0131k …’un \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k…ya y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 109\/2, 109\/3-b, 62, 53 ve 63. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 3 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, hak yoksunlu\u011funa ve mahsuba, ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n cinsel istismar\u0131 ve ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan beraatine, \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ise ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan ceza verilmesine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin, \u00c7ar\u015famba A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 23.11.2012 g\u00fcn ve 219-210 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ve san\u0131klar … ve … m\u00fcdafileri taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 14. Ceza Dairesince 12.06.2013 g\u00fcn ve 2926-7543 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “… San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda beden veya ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozacak \u015fekilde \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131 ve ma\u011fdur …’a kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma, san\u0131k \u0130sa hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdur …’a kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve san\u0131k ..hakk\u0131nda beden veya ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozacak \u015fekilde \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan kurulan h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin incelenmesinde;<\/p>\n

    Dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re, san\u0131k …’un ma\u011fdureye y\u00f6nelik nitelikli cinsel istismar su\u00e7unu TCK’nun 28. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda di\u011fer san\u0131k ‘\u0131n tehdit ve cebiri ile i\u015fledi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmakla tebli\u011fnamedeki bu hususta bozma isteyen d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceye i\u015ftirak edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Delilleri takdir ve gerek\u00e7esi g\u00f6sterilmek suretiyle san\u0131k…hakk\u0131nda beden veya ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozacak \u015fekilde \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan verilen ceza verilmesine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair h\u00fck\u00fcm ile delillerle iddia ve savunma, duru\u015fma g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde tutularak tahlil ve takdir edilmi\u015f, s\u00fcbutu kabul olunan fiillerin unsurlar\u0131na uygun \u015fekilde tavsif ve tatbikat\u0131 yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bulundu\u011fundan, san\u0131k …’\u0131n beden veya ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozacak \u015fekilde \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131 ve ma\u011fdur …’a y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ile san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n ma\u011fdur …’a kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan kurulan mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fck\u00fcmleri usul ve kanuna uygun bulundu\u011fundan san\u0131klar \u0130sa ve … m\u00fcdafileri ile O Yer Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddiyle h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin onanmas\u0131na,<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure …’e kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan kurulan h\u00fckm\u00fcn incelenmesinde ise;<\/p>\n

    Ma\u011fdure …’in 19.10.2011 tarihli savc\u0131l\u0131k beyan\u0131 ve bu beyan\u0131 do\u011frulayan \u00f6zellikle san\u0131k …’un a\u015famalardaki istikrarl\u0131 anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 ile t\u00fcm dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re; san\u0131k …’\u0131n ma\u011fdureyi ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisinde iken kilitlemek suretiyle TCK’nun 109\/1. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde beraatine karar verilmesi,<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k \u0130sa hakk\u0131nda beden veya ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozacak \u015fekilde \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan kurulan h\u00fckm\u00fcn incelenmesine gelince;<\/p>\n

    Ma\u011fdurenin \u00f6zellikle soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n kendisiyle zorla ili\u015fkiye girdi\u011fine dair beyanlar\u0131 ve san\u0131k …’un da bu beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 destekleyen anlat\u0131mlar\u0131 ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131ndan san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n TCK’nun 103\/2, 103\/6 ve 43. maddelerinde d\u00fczenlenen beden veya ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozacak \u015fekilde \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu su\u00e7tan mahk\u00fbmiyeti yerine delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesinde hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde beraatine h\u00fckmolunmas\u0131…\u201d,<\/p>\n

    \u0130sabetsizliklerinden bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    \u00c7ar\u015famba A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi ise 25.09.2013 g\u00fcn ve 152-176 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    \u201c… Yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda verilen mahkememizin 23.11.2012 tarih ve 2011\/219 Esas, 2012\/210 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar ile; san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7undan ceza verilmesine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar verilmi\u015f, san\u0131k \u0130sa hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismar, ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve tehdit su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan beraat karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f, …’ya kar\u015f\u0131 h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan 3 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve tehdit su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan beraat karar\u0131, ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015f, ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7ocu\u011fun cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan 14 y\u0131l 2 ay hapis, …’ya kar\u015f\u0131 h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan 3 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis ve ma\u011fdurlara kar\u015f\u0131 \u015fantaj su\u00e7undan ise 1 y\u0131l 6 ay 22 g\u00fcn hapis ve 2.500 TL APC ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, \u015fahtaj su\u00e7undan verilen bu h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda \u015fantaj su\u00e7undan verilen HAGB karar\u0131 itiraz edilmeksizin, san\u0131k \u0130sa hakk\u0131nda ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve tehdit su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan verilen beraat kararlar\u0131 ile san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda mala zarar verme ve tehdit su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan verilen beraat kararlar\u0131 temyiz edilmeksizin 03.12.2012 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Dosya di\u011fer h\u00fck\u00fcmler y\u00f6n\u00fcnden temyiz incelemesi i\u00e7in Yagr\u0131tay’a g\u00f6nderilmi\u015f, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131ndaki cinsel istismar su\u00e7undan verilen ceza verilmesine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan verilen 14 y\u0131l 2 ay hapis ve ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan verilen 3 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis, san\u0131k \u0130sa hakk\u0131nda ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan verilen 3 y\u0131l 4 ay hapis cezalar\u0131na dair h\u00fck\u00fcmler Yarg\u0131tay 14.CD’nin 2013\/2926-7543 E-K say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131 ile onanarak 12.06.2013 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015f, san\u0131k \u0130sa hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure …’e y\u00f6nelik cinsel istismar ve san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure …’e y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan verilen beraat kararlar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ise bozularak dosya mahkememize g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bozma sonras\u0131 dosya mahkememizin 2013\/152 yeni esas s\u0131ras\u0131na kaydedilerek taraflara bozma ilam\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 diyeceklerinin sorulmas\u0131 cihetine gidilmi\u015f, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunan ma\u011fdure ve vekili bozma ilam\u0131na bir diyecekleri olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f, iddia makam\u0131 bozmaya uyulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015f, san\u0131klar ve m\u00fcdafiileri ise Yarg\u0131tay bozma ilam\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 direnme karar\u0131 verilmesini talep etmi\u015fler, mahkememizce san\u0131klar hakk\u0131nda daha \u00f6nce verilen h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin usul ve yasaya uygun oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan direnme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    …<\/p>\n

    San\u0131klar\u0131n savunmas\u0131, ma\u011fdure ve m\u00fc\u015fteki anlat\u0131mlar\u0131, adli raporlar, OM\u00dc raporlar\u0131, T\u0130B kay\u0131tlar\u0131 ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

    Olay tarihi olan 16 Temmuz 2011 g\u00fcn\u00fc ak\u015fam saatlerinde san\u0131k …’un ma\u011fdur san\u0131k …’yu arayarak viski i\u00e7mek \u00fczere \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131, …’un bunu kabul etmesi \u00fczerine san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n …’u Terme il\u00e7esinden \u015eahin marka ara\u00e7 ile alarak birlikte … isimli i\u015fyerinin arka taraf\u0131ndaki san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n kay\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu sahil kenar\u0131na gittikleri, burada san\u0131k …’un Nissan marka arac\u0131 ile onlar\u0131 bekledi\u011fi, san\u0131k …’\u0131n …’u bu araca \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131, …’un gitti\u011fi, \u015fof\u00f6r koltu\u011funun yan\u0131ndaki koltu\u011fa oturdu\u011fu, bu s\u0131rada san\u0131k …’\u0131n arac\u0131n kap\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131 kilitleyerek …’a eli ile vurmaya ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve ‘..i ara, buraya \u00e7a\u011f\u0131r’ dedi\u011fi, bu s\u0131rada \u0130sa’n\u0131n ise d\u0131\u015far\u0131da i\u00e7ki i\u00e7ip onlar\u0131 izledi\u011fi, devam\u0131nda ise \u0130sa’n\u0131n …’a kap\u0131n\u0131n cam\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131rt\u0131p \u0130sa’n\u0131n da …’a vurmaya ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131, …’\u0131n, …’un elinden cep telefonunu al\u0131p ‘…’i ara, yoksa burada seni \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcr\u00fcz, elini kolunu k\u0131rar\u0131z’ \u015feklinde tehdit ettikleri, bunun \u00fczerine san\u0131k …’un telefonla …’i arad\u0131\u011f\u0131, telefonun hoparl\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131k tuttu\u011fu, san\u0131k …’un telefonla …’i arayarak g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fmeleri gerekti\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, …’in ise Fatsa’da oldu\u011funu, gelince arayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, bu \u015fekilde telefonun kapand\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131klar \u0130sa ve …’\u0131n …’u bu \u015fekilde tuttuklar\u0131, bir s\u00fcre sonra gece vakti …’in …’u arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve gelece\u011fini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, san\u0131k … ile …’un Nissan marka ara\u00e7 ile …’i \u0130kizce yol kav\u015fa\u011f\u0131ndan ald\u0131klar\u0131 ve sahilde bulunduklar\u0131 ayn\u0131 yere geldikleri, \u0130sa’n\u0131n ise onlar\u0131 orada bekledi\u011fi, ara\u00e7 park edince san\u0131k …’\u0131n …’a arka tarafta oturan …’in yan\u0131na ge\u00e7mesini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi ve …’in \u00fczerindeki buluzu zorla y\u0131rtt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve soyunmas\u0131n\u0131 istedi\u011fi, sonras\u0131nda …’\u0131n …’a hitaben ‘Sen bu k\u0131zla birlikte olacaks\u0131n’ dedi\u011fi, …’un \u00f6nce kabul etmedi\u011fi, bunun \u00fczerine …’\u0131n …’a yumrukla vurmaya ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bunun \u00fczerine ma\u011fdurenin ‘Tamam, ne yapacaksan yap, yeter ki buradan kurtulal\u0131m’ diyerek alt taraftaki k\u0131yafetini de \u00e7\u0131kard\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131k …’u kendisine do\u011fru \u00e7ekti\u011fi, cinsel organ\u0131na dokunarak sertle\u015fmesini sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131, …’un cinsel organ\u0131n\u0131 ma\u011fdurenin cinsel organ\u0131na soktu\u011fu, bu s\u0131rada san\u0131k …’\u0131n cep telefonu ile her ikisinin \u00e7\u0131plak halde ve ili\u015fki s\u0131ras\u0131nda foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ekti\u011fi, san\u0131k …’un d\u0131\u015far\u0131ya bo\u015fald\u0131\u011f\u0131, sonras\u0131nda k\u0131yafetlerini giydikleri, daha sonra san\u0131k …’\u0131n ma\u011fdureyi d\u0131\u015far\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kararak ma\u011fdurenin istemi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda organ sokmak suretiyle ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismarda bulundu\u011fu, daha sonra san\u0131k …’\u0131n Nissan marka ara\u00e7la …’u anayol kenar\u0131na kadar g\u00f6t\u00fcr\u00fcp geri olay yerine d\u00f6nd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, ma\u011fdurenin di\u011fer san\u0131klarla birlikte orada kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131k …’dan \u00e7ekti\u011fi foto\u011fraflar\u0131 silmesini istedi\u011fi, san\u0131k …’\u0131n ise karde\u015fi Fatih’i kastederek ‘Fatih’ten ayr\u0131lacaks\u0131n, yoksa foto\u011fraflar\u0131 hem Fatih’e hem de ailene g\u00f6steririm’ diyerek foto\u011fraflar\u0131 silmedi\u011fi, gece yar\u0131s\u0131na do\u011fru san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n arac\u0131 ile ma\u011fdureyi evine b\u0131rakt\u0131\u011f\u0131, ilk g\u00fcnlerde ma\u011fdurenin kendisine yap\u0131lan \u015fantaj\u0131n da etkisi ile \u015fikayette bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2011 y\u0131l\u0131 Eyl\u00fcl ay\u0131 ba\u015flar\u0131nda ma\u011fdurenin \u015fikayette bulundu\u011fu, olay\u0131n bu \u015fekilde resmiyete intikal etti\u011fi, olay\u0131n bu \u015fekilde geli\u015fti\u011fi, olu\u015fun b\u00f6yle oldu\u011fu mahkememizce kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Ma\u011fdurenin soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131ndaki beyan\u0131 ile mahkememizdeki beyan\u0131 aras\u0131nda farkl\u0131l\u0131klar bulundu\u011fu, yine san\u0131k …’un soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131ndaki savunmas\u0131 ile mahkememizdeki savunmas\u0131 aras\u0131nda k\u0131smi farkl\u0131l\u0131klar bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmakla; di\u011fer san\u0131klar\u0131n cezadan kurtulmalar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak ifade de\u011fi\u015fikliklerinin yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f, ancak su\u00e7un s\u00fcbutuna y\u00f6nelik mahkememizde olu\u015fan kanaat y\u00f6n\u00fcnden g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

    Ma\u011fdur san\u0131k …’un olay gecesi kendisinde olu\u015fan yaralar\u0131n etkisi ile Terme Devlet Hastanesine ba\u015fvurdu\u011fu, ancak kendisine yap\u0131lan olay\u0131 farkl\u0131 anlatt\u0131\u011f\u0131, merdivenden d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, san\u0131k …’un o gece acil serviste tedavisinin yap\u0131larak taburcu edildi\u011fi, sol g\u00f6z \u00e7evresinde \u00f6dem bulundu\u011fu, v\u00fccudunun \u00e7e\u015fitli yerlerinde darp izleri bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k …’nun, kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 0543 688 … … numaral\u0131 cep telefonu ile olay g\u00fcn\u00fc ma\u011fdure ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme kayd\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k … ile ma\u011fdurenin anlat\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 do\u011frulad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Olaydan sonra san\u0131k …’a ait Nokia E72 marka cep telefonuna ait haf\u0131za kart\u0131ndaki silinmi\u015f g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fclerin bilgisayar program\u0131 yard\u0131m\u0131 ile haf\u0131za kart\u0131na geri y\u00fcklenmesi sonucunda ma\u011fdure ve san\u0131k …’un anlat\u0131m\u0131na uygun bir \u015fekilde cinsel ili\u015fki s\u0131ras\u0131nda \u00e7ekilen foto\u011fraflar elde edilerek dosya i\u00e7erisine al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    OM\u00dc taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen 08.09.2011 tarihli raporda ma\u011fdurenin bakire olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair rapor verildi\u011fi bildirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    OM\u00dc taraf\u0131ndan d\u00fczenlenen 07.02.2012 tarihli raporda ma\u011fdurenin depresif bozukluk ve travma sonras\u0131 stres bozuklu\u011fu sebebiyle ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011fu bildirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Ma\u011fdur san\u0131k …’nun ba\u015f\u0131ndan beri birbirine uygunluk g\u00f6steren anlat\u0131m\u0131, olay gecesi hastaneye ba\u015fvurmu\u015f olmas\u0131, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimine dair ma\u011fdure …’in san\u0131k ….’un anlat\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 destekleyen beyanlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; san\u0131klar \u0130sa ve …’\u0131n, … Tesislerinin arka taraf\u0131nda bulunan sahilde san\u0131k …’a ait ara\u00e7 i\u00e7inde \u00f6n sa\u011f koltukta oturan ma\u011fdur san\u0131k …’u orada zorla tuttuklar\u0131, arac\u0131n kap\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131 kilitledikleri, her ikisinin de ma\u011fdur san\u0131\u011fa yumrukla vurarak darp ettikleri ve ma\u011fdure …’i aramaya zorlad\u0131klar\u0131, bu \u015fekilde san\u0131klar\u0131n m\u00fc\u015fterek eylem ve irade birli\u011fi i\u00e7erisinde ma\u011fdur san\u0131k …’a kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledikleri sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclerek cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131na karar verilmi\u015f, su\u00e7un birden fazla ki\u015fi taraf\u0131ndan i\u015flendi\u011finden cezada art\u0131r\u0131m yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ancak su\u00e7un ma\u011fdur san\u0131\u011fa kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel ama\u00e7la i\u015flenmedi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan TCK’nun 109\/5. maddesinde yer alan art\u0131r\u0131m h\u00fckm\u00fc uygulanmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Ma\u011fdurenin a\u015famalarda san\u0131k …’un kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etti\u011fi eylemlere dair birbirine uygunluk g\u00f6steren anlat\u0131m\u0131, san\u0131k …’nun san\u0131k …’un eylemine y\u00f6nelik a\u015famalarda uygunluk g\u00f6steren anlat\u0131m\u0131, san\u0131k …’un ayn\u0131 gece Terme Devlet Hastanesine yaralanmas\u0131 sebebiyle ba\u015fvuruda bulunmas\u0131, Terme Devlet Hastanesinin bu konu ile ilgili muayene kay\u0131tlar\u0131, san\u0131k …’un cep telefonu haf\u0131za kart\u0131ndan elde edilen foto\u011fraflar ve ma\u011fdurenin ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bozuldu\u011funa dair OM\u00dc raporu birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; olay gecesi san\u0131k …’\u0131n kendisine ait Nissan marka arac\u0131n arka koltu\u011funda ma\u011fdurenin elbiselerini y\u0131rt\u0131p ma\u011fdureyi darp ettikten sonra san\u0131k …’u ma\u011fdure ile ili\u015fkiye girmeye zorlad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k …’un kabul etmemesi \u00fczerine san\u0131k …’a da yumrukla vurdu\u011fu, ma\u011fdurenin san\u0131k …’\u0131n elinden kurtulmak i\u00e7in san\u0131k …’a ili\u015fkiye girmeleri y\u00f6n\u00fcnde beyanda bulunup san\u0131k …’u \u00fczerine do\u011fru \u00e7ekip cinsel organ\u0131n\u0131 sertle\u015ftirdi\u011fi ve san\u0131k …’un ve ma\u011fdurenin san\u0131k …’\u0131n cebir ve \u015fiddeti alt\u0131nda organ sokmak suretiyle ili\u015fkiye girdikleri, bu eylemden TCK’nun 28. maddesinde de belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere san\u0131k …’\u0131n asli fail olarak sorumlu oldu\u011fu, daha sonra san\u0131k …’\u0131n ma\u011fdure ile arac\u0131n d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kendisinin de organ sokmak suretiyle ili\u015fkiye girdi\u011fi, ma\u011fdurenin bu ili\u015fkiye r\u0131zas\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ancak san\u0131k …’\u0131n cebir kullanmas\u0131 sebebiyle bir \u015fey diyemedi\u011fi, bu \u015fekilde san\u0131k …’un ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 ruh sa\u011fl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bozacak \u015fekilde zincirleme nitelikli cinsel istismar su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclerek cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k …’\u0131n ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisinde cinsel ili\u015fki s\u0131ras\u0131nda … ile ma\u011fdurenin foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 \u00e7ekip bu foto\u011fraflar\u0131 yay\u0131nlayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ba\u015fkalar\u0131na g\u00f6sterece\u011fini s\u00f6ylemek suretiyle \u015fantaj su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi de sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclerek cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmi\u015f, su\u00e7un i\u015fleni\u015findeki \u00f6zellikler nazara al\u0131narak te\u015fdiden uygulama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, bir fiil ile birden fazla ki\u015fiye kar\u015f\u0131 eylem ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finden tek bir \u015fantaj su\u00e7unun oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131larak her iki ma\u011fdura kar\u015f\u0131 zincirleme \u015fantaj su\u00e7undan uygulama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, san\u0131k …’\u0131n daha \u00f6nce sab\u0131kas\u0131n\u0131n olmamas\u0131 ve ceza miktar\u0131 nazara al\u0131narak h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 istemiyle kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de, san\u0131k …’un ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismar eylemini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirme kast\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimine bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ak\u015fam saatlerinden beri san\u0131k …’\u0131n ve ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdikleri darp ve h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma eylemlerinden sonra …’in olay yerine gelmesini m\u00fcteakip ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisinde …’e ve kendisine y\u00f6nelik tehdit ve darp eylemlerinin etkisi ile olay yerinin sahilde ve \u0131ss\u0131z bir yer olmas\u0131n\u0131n da do\u011furdu\u011fu etki ile ve nihayetinde ma\u011fdurenin ‘Yap da kurtulal\u0131m’ \u015feklindeki iste\u011finin sonucu olarak ma\u011fdure ile ili\u015fkiye girdi\u011fi, bu eylemden dolay\u0131 san\u0131k …’un sorumlu tutulamayaca\u011f\u0131, TCK’nun 28. maddesinde yer alan ‘Kar\u015f\u0131 koyamayaca\u011f\u0131 veya kurtulamayaca\u011f\u0131 cebir ve \u015fiddet veya muhakkak ve a\u011f\u0131r bir korkutma veya tehdit sonucu su\u00e7 i\u015fleyen kimseye ceza verilmez. Bu gibi hallerde cebir ve \u015fiddet, korkutma ve tehdidi kullanan ki\u015fi su\u00e7un faili say\u0131l\u0131r’ h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince uygulama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, TCK’nun 28. maddesinde yer alan mecburiyet halinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in cebir veya tehditle zarar g\u00f6ren hukuki de\u011fer ile bu cebir veya tehdidin etkisinde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen haks\u0131zl\u0131\u011f\u0131n dair oldu\u011fu hukuki de\u011fer aras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan mukayeseli de\u011ferlendirmede tercihin birinci lehine olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, olay\u0131m\u0131zda da san\u0131k …’un tenha say\u0131labilecek bir yerde kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen darp ve tehdit eylemlerinin kendisinde olu\u015fturdu\u011fu korku ve ac\u0131n\u0131n etkisi ile ve ma\u011fdurenin de iknas\u0131 ile ma\u011fdurenin cinsel dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131na y\u00f6nelik hukuki de\u011ferine zarar verildi\u011fi, san\u0131k …’un hukuki durumunun TCK’nun 28. maddesine uydu\u011fu sabit g\u00f6r\u00fclerek san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda cinsel istismar su\u00e7undan ceza verilmesine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ve tehdit su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 istemiyle de dava a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de, ma\u011fdurenin yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 tehdit i\u00e7eren bir eylemden bahsetmedi\u011fi, \u015fantaj eylemine y\u00f6nelik s\u00f6zlerden bahsetti\u011fi, ayr\u0131ca ma\u011fdurenin olay yerine kendi iste\u011fiyle geldi\u011fi, olay tarihi itibariyle 15 ya\u015f\u0131ndan b\u00fcy\u00fck oldu\u011fu, r\u0131zas\u0131n\u0131n hukuken ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu, ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisinde ve ara\u00e7 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kendisine kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7unun i\u015flenmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda orada tutulmas\u0131n\u0131n cinsel istismar su\u00e7unun unsurlar\u0131 aras\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilebilece\u011fi, ayr\u0131ca ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7unun olu\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131, keza eylemden sonra zorla olay yerinde tutuldu\u011funa y\u00f6nelik bir delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu duruma g\u00f6re san\u0131k …’un bu su\u00e7lar\u0131 i\u015fledi\u011fine y\u00f6nelik cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na yeter delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatine var\u0131larak beraatine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure…’e kar\u015f\u0131 cinsel istismar ve ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma ile tehdit su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 istemiyle kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 bu eylemlerle ilgili ma\u011fdure ve san\u0131k …’un haz\u0131rl\u0131k ifadelerinden farkl\u0131 olarak san\u0131k lehine beyanda bulunduklar\u0131, ma\u011fdure…olay yerine geldikten sonra san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n sahilde bir k\u00f6\u015fede i\u00e7ki i\u00e7ti\u011finin beyan edildi\u011fi, san\u0131k \u0130sa i\u00e7ki i\u00e7erken ayr\u0131 bir yerde Nissan marka ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisinde di\u011fer eylemlerin ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi, san\u0131k \u0130sa’n\u0131n ara\u00e7 i\u00e7erisinde ve ara\u00e7tan \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131ktan sonra san\u0131k … taraf\u0131ndan ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen eylemlere bilin\u00e7li olarak kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na, yard\u0131m etti\u011fine y\u00f6nelik san\u0131\u011f\u0131n cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na yeter delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, beyanlar aras\u0131ndaki \u00e7eli\u015fki sebebiyle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n durumunun \u015f\u00fcphe arzetti\u011fi kanaatine var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu su\u00e7lardan beraatine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ayr\u0131ca ma\u011fdureye kar\u015f\u0131 mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise de, bu su\u00e7un \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, ma\u011fdurenin de yarg\u0131lama a\u015famas\u0131nda \u015fikayetinden vazge\u00e7ti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan san\u0131k hakk\u0131ndaki kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u015fmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k …’un kullan\u0131m\u0131nda olan ve cinsel istismar eyleminin i\u00e7inde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011fi … … plaka say\u0131l\u0131 Nissan marka arac\u0131n m\u00fcsaderesine karar verilmesi talep edilmi\u015f ise de, arac\u0131n m\u00fcsaderesine y\u00f6nelik \u015fartlar\u0131n olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, arac\u0131n ‘su\u00e7un i\u015flenmesinde kullan\u0131lan e\u015fya’ niteli\u011finde bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, e\u015fyan\u0131n ‘su\u00e7un i\u015flenmesine tahsis edilen’ durumunda kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in ise su\u00e7a konu arac\u0131n devaml\u0131 cinsel istismar su\u00e7unun i\u015flenmesine tahsis edilen bir e\u015fya niteli\u011finde bulunmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, halbuki dosyam\u0131za konu olan olayda, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimi itibariyle su\u00e7a konu arac\u0131n kullan\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, m\u00fcnhas\u0131ran arac\u0131n bu i\u015f i\u00e7in \u00f6zg\u00fclendi\u011fine dair delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan arac\u0131n iadesine karar verilmi\u015ftir…”,<\/p>\n

    Gerek\u00e7esiyle direnerek \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmdeki gibi ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik olarak san\u0131k …’un \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131, san\u0131k …’un ise ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan beraatlerine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu h\u00fckm\u00fcn de Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ve ma\u011fdure vekili taraf\u0131ndan taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine, Yarg\u0131tay C.Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 11.01.2014 g\u00fcn ve 381130 Say\u0131l\u0131 \u201cbozma\u201d istekli tebli\u011fnamesi ile Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n

    KARAR : San\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n cinsel istismar\u0131 ve \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k….’ya y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k …’ya y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan kurulan mahk\u00fbmiyet ve \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n cinsel istismar\u0131 su\u00e7undan ceza verilmesine yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair h\u00fck\u00fcmler \u00d6zel Dairece onanmak, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik mala zarar verme su\u00e7undan \u015fik\u00e2yetten vazge\u00e7me sebebiyle kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u015fmesi, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan kurulan beraat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri temyiz edilmeksizin, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda ma\u011fdure … ve \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i san\u0131k …’ya y\u00f6nelik \u015fantaj su\u00e7undan kurulan h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 karar\u0131 da itiraz edilmeksizin kesinle\u015fmi\u015f olup direnmenin kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik olarak san\u0131k …’un \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131, san\u0131k …’un ise ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7undan kurulan beraat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri ile s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olarak m\u00fcmeyyiz olan ma\u011fdurenin kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda \u015fik\u00e2yetinden vazge\u00e7mesi, gerek kendisinin gerekse de ad\u0131na herhangi bir temsilcisinin usul\u00fcne uygun bi\u00e7imde ba\u015fvuruda bulunarak kat\u0131lan s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131 kazanmamas\u0131 sebebiyle baro taraf\u0131ndan g\u00f6revlendirilen vekilinin h\u00fckm\u00fc temyize hakk\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, temyiz talebinin 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 8. maddesi uyar\u0131nca halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 317. maddesi uyar\u0131nca reddine karar verilerek Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizine hasren inceleme yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    \u00d6zel Daire ile yerel mahkeme aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; ma\u011fdure …’a y\u00f6nelik olarak san\u0131k …’un \u00e7ocu\u011fun nitelikli cinsel istismar\u0131, san\u0131k …’un ise ki\u015fiyi h\u00fcrriyetinden yoksun k\u0131lma su\u00e7unun sabit olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine dair ise de; Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7 Y\u00f6netmeli\u011finin 27. maddesi uyar\u0131nca direnme h\u00fckm\u00fc kurulurken haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6zlerinin sorulmamas\u0131 suretiyle savunma haklar\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlan\u0131p s\u0131n\u0131rlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn yasal ve yeterli gerek\u00e7eyi ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131p ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ncelikle de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkemece bozmadan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bozma ilam\u0131na dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan sonra yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilerek haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6zleri sorulmadan ve yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcreci ile ilgili bilgi verilip sadece \u00f6nceki karar\u0131n usul ve yasaya uygun oldu\u011fu belirtilmekle yetinilerek bozma karar\u0131na ni\u00e7in uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klanmadan kesinle\u015fen h\u00fck\u00fcmleri de kapsayacak bi\u00e7imde ilk h\u00fck\u00fcmde g\u00f6sterilenler ile tamamen ayn\u0131 gerek\u00e7eyle direnme karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 251. maddesine benzer d\u00fczenlemeler i\u00e7eren 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216. maddesinin son f\u0131kras\u0131nda; \u201cH\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilir\u201d d\u00fczenlemesi yer almaktad\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm gere\u011fince kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu takdirde son s\u00f6z mutlaka san\u0131\u011fa verilerek duru\u015fma bitirilecektir. Ceza Genel Kurulunun 03.03.2015 g\u00fcn-170-20; 03.06.2014 g\u00fcn ve 1207-309; 29.01.2013 g\u00fcn ve 1406-30; 28.04.2009 g\u00fcn ve 77-111; 29.01.2008 g\u00fcn ve 193-7; 04.12.2007 g\u00fcn ve 246-261; 25.04.2006 g\u00fcn ve 3-124 ile 06.07.2004 g\u00fcn ve 138-159; say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere; savunma hakk\u0131 ile yak\u0131ndan ilgili bulunan bu usul kural\u0131 emredici nitelikte olup, uyulmamas\u0131 kanuna mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r. Ceza muhakemesinde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en \u00f6nemli hakk\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131 olup, haz\u0131r oldu\u011fu oturumda son s\u00f6z san\u0131\u011fa verilmeden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Temyiz merciince verilen bozma kararlar\u0131ndan sonra ilk derece mahkemelerince yarg\u0131lamaya devam olundu\u011funda dava hen\u00fcz sonu\u00e7lanmam\u0131\u015f bulundu\u011fundan, ilk defa h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulurken \u201cson s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi\u201d kural\u0131, bozmadan sonra ba\u015flayan yarg\u0131lamada da kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n kesintisizlik ve s\u00fcreklilik ilkesinin do\u011fal sonucu olarak aynen ge\u00e7erlidir. Kovu\u015fturman\u0131n sona erdirilmesi ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn tesis ve tefhimine ge\u00e7ilmesi \u00f6ncesinde, son konu\u015fan taraf\u0131n haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131k olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi \u015feklinde anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken \u201cen son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi” kural\u0131na uyulmamas\u0131, bu durumlarda da 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Nitekim \u00f6\u011fretide; “Son s\u00f6z san\u0131\u011f\u0131nd\u0131r. Son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi, m\u00fcdafaa bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00e7ok \u00f6nemlidir. Bunun i\u00e7indir ki son s\u00f6z\u00fcn haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilmemesi mutlak temyiz sebebi (hukuka kesin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k) ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bozma sebebi say\u0131lmaktad\u0131r” (Nurullah Kunter, ….. Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 18. Bas\u0131, Beta Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, \u0130stanbul 2014, s. 1484); “H\u00fck\u00fcm (karar) safhas\u0131na ge\u00e7meden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilmek zorundad\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm (CMK’nun 216\/3) silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve su\u00e7suzluk karinesi ilkelerinin bir gere\u011fi olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f ve uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu emredici bir h\u00fck\u00fcmd\u00fcr… Son s\u00f6z hakk\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi, bozmadan sonraki yarg\u0131lamada da uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu bir usul kural\u0131d\u0131r.” (Yener \u00dcnver, Hakan Hakeri, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 7. Bas\u0131, Adalet Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara 2013, cilt: 2, s. 146 ve 149) \u015feklinde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmek suretiyle, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa mutlaka son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmesi gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi ittifakla benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    \u00d6te yandan Ceza Genel Kurulunun yerle\u015fmi\u015f uygulamalar\u0131na g\u00f6re de, bir karar bozulmakla tamamen ortadan kalkaca\u011f\u0131ndan, yerel mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan CMK’nun 34, 230 ve 232. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca yeniden usul\u00fcne uygun olarak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131, bunun yan\u0131nda direnmeye dair gerek\u00e7enin de g\u00f6sterilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

    Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda \u00f6n sorunlar\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesinde;<\/p>\n

    Bozmadan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bozma ilam\u0131na dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan sonra yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilerek h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6zlerinin verilmemesi 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fundan, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furan bu usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k sebebiyle yerel mahkeme direnme karar\u0131nda isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Di\u011fer taraftan yerel mahkemece, bozulmakla ortadan kalkan eski h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnilmesine karar verildikten sonra, bozma karar\u0131na ni\u00e7in uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klanmadan kesinle\u015fen su\u00e7lar\u0131 da kapsayacak bi\u00e7imde ilk h\u00fck\u00fcmde g\u00f6sterilenler ile tamamen ayn\u0131 gerek\u00e7eyle direnme karar\u0131 verilmesi de usul ve kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Bu itibarla, yerel mahkeme direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, saptanan bu usuli nedenlerden dolay\u0131 sair y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmedir.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 :<\/strong> A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

    1-) \u00c7ar\u015famba A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi’nin 25.09.2013 g\u00fcn ve 152-176 Say\u0131l\u0131 direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6zlerinin verilmemesi ve usul ve kanuna uygun olarak direnme gerek\u00e7eleri g\u00f6sterilmeden karar verilmesi isabetsizliklerinden sair y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n

    2-) Dosyan\u0131n, mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 09.02.2016 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    3. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2015\/14163<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2015\/30986<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 4.11.2015<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>Mahalli mahkemece verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm temyiz edilmekle evrak okunarak;<\/p>\n

    Gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc;<\/p>\n

    KARAR : <\/b>O yer Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k lehine oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131larak yap\u0131larak incelemede;<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k hakk\u0131ndaki h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131ndan sonra, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n denetim s\u00fcresi i\u00e7erisinde kas\u0131tl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 i\u015flemesi nedeniyle 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nin 231\/11. maddesi gere\u011fince \u00f6nceki h\u00fckm\u00fcn aynen a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 ile yetinilmesi gerekirken, 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nin 51. maddesi gere\u011fince ertelenmesine karar verilmesi aleyhe temyiz olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddine, ancak;<\/p>\n

    1) Karar duru\u015fmas\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa esas hakk\u0131ndaki savunmas\u0131n\u0131n ve son s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fcn sorulmamas\u0131 suretiyle 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nin 216\/3. maddesine muhalefet edilmesi,<\/p>\n

    2) Kabule g\u00f6re de; san\u0131\u011fa h\u00fckmedilen k\u0131sa s\u00fcreli hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131n 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nin 51. maddesi gere\u011fince ertelendi\u011fi halde TCK’nin 53\/4. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak TCK’nin 53\/1. maddesindeki haklardan yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmesi,<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f, o yer Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu sebeplerden 5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8\/1. maddesi ile y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’un 321. maddesi uyar\u0131nca istem gibi BOZULMASINA, 04\/11\/2015 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    3. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2015\/18641<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2015\/29337<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 21.10.2015<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>Mahalli mahkemece bozma \u00fczerine verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm temyiz edilmekle evrak okunarak;<\/p>\n

    Gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc;<\/p>\n

    KARAR : <\/b>San\u0131\u011f\u0131n sarf\u0131na sebebiyet verdi\u011fi, yarg\u0131lama gideri miktar\u0131n\u0131n, 6183 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 106. maddesindeki terkin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7inde kalmas\u0131 nedeniyle, bu giderin 6352 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 100. maddesi ile de\u011fi\u015fik 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nin 324\/4. maddesi uyar\u0131nca Devlet Hazinesine y\u00fcklenmesine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmemi\u015f ise de, bu husus karar\u0131n kesinle\u015ftirilmesi a\u015famas\u0131nda mahkemesince dikkate al\u0131nabilece\u011finden bozma nedeni yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Di\u011fer temyiz itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n reddine, ancak;<\/p>\n

    1- T\u00fcrkiye Cumhuriyeti Anayasas\u0131’n\u0131n 141\/3, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nin 34, 230 ve 289. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca, mahkeme kararlar\u0131n\u0131n Yarg\u0131tay denetimine olanak sa\u011flayacak \u015fekilde a\u00e7\u0131k olmas\u0131 ve Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n bu i\u015flevini yerine getirebilmesi i\u00e7in karar\u0131n dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131 t\u00fcm kan\u0131tlar\u0131n, bu kan\u0131tlara g\u00f6re mahkemenin ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 son<\/b>u\u00e7lar\u0131n, iddia, savunma ve dosyadaki di\u011fer belgelere ili\u015fkin de\u011ferlendirmelerin, san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemlerinin ne oldu\u011funun a\u00e7\u0131k olarak gerek\u00e7eye yans\u0131t\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken bu ilkelere uyulmadan gerek\u00e7eden yoksun olarak yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    2- Bozma karar\u0131na uyulduktan sonra san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fcn sorulmamas\u0131 suretiyle CMK’nin 216\/3. maddesine muhalefet edilmesi,<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 :<\/strong> Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f san\u0131\u011f\u0131n temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan h\u00fckm\u00fcn bu sebepten 5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8\/1. maddesi ile y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’un 321. maddesi uyar\u0131nca isteme uygun olarak BOZULMASINA, 21.10.2015 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    17. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2015\/8941<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2015\/6837<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 6.10.2015<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>Mahalli mahkemece verilen h\u00fck\u00fcm temyiz edilmekle incelenerek, gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n

    KARAR : <\/b>O yer Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n 13.11.2008 tarihli temyiz talebinin, san\u0131klar lehine oldu\u011fu kabul edilerek yap\u0131lan temyiz incelemesinde;<\/p>\n

    Ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulunun 22.1.2013 tarih 2013\/19 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda vurguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK n\u0131n 216\/3. maddesinde, \u201ch\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z\u00fcn, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilece\u011finin\u201d d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa sorulmas\u0131n\u0131n yasa taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011fa tan\u0131nm\u0131\u015f bir hak olup, bu hakk\u0131n bizzat san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmekle, san\u0131klar … ve …’\u0131n haz\u0131r olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 karar oturumunda son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131klar yerine ge\u00e7mek \u00fczere m\u00fcdafiilerinden sorulmamas\u0131 sebebiyle bozma talep eden tebli\u011fnamedeki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceye i\u015ftirak edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Dosya ve duru\u015fma tutanaklar\u0131 i\u00e7eri\u011fine, toplan\u0131p karar yerinde incelenerek tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lan hukuken ge\u00e7erli ve elveri\u015fli kan\u0131tlara, gerek\u00e7eye ve hakimin takdirine g\u00f6re; at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7un san\u0131klar taraf\u0131ndan i\u015flendi\u011fini kabulde usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, di\u011fer temyiz nedenleri yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Ancak,<\/p>\n

    1-)Dosya kapsam\u0131ndan, 19.10.2005 g\u00fcn\u00fc m\u00fc\u015fteki …’\u0131n, …’ \u0130stanbul \u015eubesi nezdinde bulunan hesab\u0131na, internet \u015fifresi k\u0131r\u0131lmak suretiyle girilerek, hesapta bulunan 5000 Amerikan Dolar\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k … ad\u0131na a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131 bulunan ayn\u0131 bankan\u0131n …’ \u015eubesi nezdindeki hesaba havale edildi\u011fi, kar\u0131-koca olan san\u0131klar … ve …’\u0131n, ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn paray\u0131 \u00e7ekmek \u00fczere bankaya gittiklerinde, ilgili banka taraf\u0131ndan hesaba bloke uygulanmas\u0131 sebebiyle paray\u0131 \u00e7ekemeden yakaland\u0131klar\u0131; 13.12.2005 g\u00fcn\u00fc m\u00fc\u015fteki …’n\u0131n …’ Bankas\u0131 …’ \u015eubesi nezdinde bulunan hesab\u0131na internet \u015fifresi k\u0131r\u0131lmak suretiyle girilerek, hesapta bulunan 3700 TL nin san\u0131k … ad\u0131na a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131 … …’ \u015eubesi nezdindeki hesaba EFT edildi\u011fi, su\u00e7a konu paran\u0131n ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn san\u0131k … taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7ekildi\u011fi; 13.12.2005 g\u00fcn\u00fc m\u00fc\u015fteki …’\u0131n …’ Bankas\u0131 …’ \u015eubesi nezdinde bulunan hesab\u0131na internet \u015fifresi k\u0131r\u0131lmak suretiyle girilerek, hesapta bulunan 4950 TL nin san\u0131k … ad\u0131na a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131<\/p>\n

    …’ …’ \u015eubesi nezdindeki hesaba EFT edildi\u011fi, su\u00e7a konu paran\u0131n ayn\u0131 g\u00fcn san\u0131k … taraf\u0131ndan \u00e7ekildi\u011fi; aralar\u0131nda 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK n\u0131n 11. maddesi uyar\u0131nca geni\u015f ba\u011flant\u0131 bulundu\u011fu kabul edilen dava dosyalar\u0131n\u0131n birle\u015ftirilerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmesine karar verildi\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu’nun 17.11.2009 g\u00fcn ve 193\/268 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere; san\u0131klar … ve …’\u0131n, m\u00fc\u015fteki …’a y\u00f6nelik eylemleri ile san\u0131k …’un, m\u00fc\u015ftekiler … ve …’a y\u00f6nelik eylemlerinin ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 olmak \u00fczere 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’n\u0131n 142\/2-e maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen “bili\u015fim sisteminin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle h\u0131rs\u0131zl\u0131k” su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011funun g\u00f6zetilmemesi,<\/p>\n

    2-)M\u00fc\u015fteki …’\u0131n, …’\u015eubesi nezdinde bulunan hesab\u0131ndaki 5000 Amerikan Dolar\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k … ad\u0131na a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131 bulunan ayn\u0131 bankan\u0131n …’\u015eubesi nezdindeki hesaba havale edilmesi ile birlikte at\u0131l\u0131 bili\u015fim sisteminin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle h\u0131rs\u0131zl\u0131k su\u00e7unun tamamland\u0131\u011f\u0131, su\u00e7a konu paran\u0131n sonradan ilgili bankan\u0131n hesaba bloke koymas\u0131 sebebiyle san\u0131klar … ve … taraf\u0131ndan nakit olarak \u00e7ekilmemesinin, at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7a te\u015febb\u00fcs olarak de\u011ferlendirilemeyece\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda san\u0131klar … ve … hakk\u0131n kurulan h\u00fck\u00fcmlerde TCK n\u0131n 35. maddesi uygulanmak suretiyle ceza indirimine gidilmesi,<\/p>\n

    3-)M\u00fc\u015fteki …’n\u0131n talimat mahkemesindeki beyan\u0131 okunarak, kamu davas\u0131na kat\u0131lma talebinde bulundu\u011funun 27.5.2008 tarihli oturum tutana\u011f\u0131na derc edildi\u011fi, ayn\u0131 oturumda haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131k … ve m\u00fcdafiine ise bu hususta diyecekleri sorulmadan, kat\u0131lma karar\u0131 verilmek suretiyle 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK n\u0131n 238\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturulmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    4-)San\u0131klar … ve … hakk\u0131nda TCK n\u0131n 158\/1-f maddesinin tatbiki ile san\u0131klar\u0131n neticeten 1 y\u0131l 3 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile 5679 TL adli para cezas\u0131 ile mahkumiyetlerine karar verildi\u011fi, ayn\u0131 Kanun’un 51. maddesi uyar\u0131ca adli para cezalar\u0131 ertelenemez ise de, h\u00fck\u00fcm f\u0131kras\u0131nda, hapis ve adli para cezas\u0131 ayr\u0131m\u0131 g\u00f6sterilmeksizin \u201cverilen cezalar\u0131n ertelenmesine\u201d \u015feklinde karar verilmesi,<\/p>\n

    5-)Kasten i\u015flemi\u015f olduklar\u0131 su\u00e7lar dolay\u0131s\u0131yla hapis cezalar\u0131yla mahk\u00fbmiyetin yasal sonucu olarak san\u0131klar\u0131n, 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’n\u0131n 53\/1.maddesinin (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) bentlerinde yaz\u0131l\u0131 haklardan ayn\u0131 maddenin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca cezalar\u0131n\u0131n infaz\u0131 tamamlan\u0131ncaya kadar, kendi alt soylar\u0131 \u00fczerindeki velayet, vesayet ve kayy\u0131ml\u0131k yetkileri a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ise an\u0131lan maddenin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca mahk\u00fbm olduklar\u0131 hapis cezalar\u0131ndan ko\u015fullu sal\u0131verilinceye kadar yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lmalar\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden, yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : <\/b>Bozmay\u0131 gerektirmi\u015f, san\u0131klar …, … ve … m\u00fcdafiileri ile o yer Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz nedenleri bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f oldu\u011fundan, h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanan sebeple tebli\u011fnameye k\u0131smen uygun olarak BOZULMASINA, ceza s\u00fcresi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 8\/1.maddesi yollamas\u0131yla 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 326\/son maddesi uyar\u0131nca san\u0131klar\u0131n kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f haklar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6zetilmesine, 06.10.2015 tarihinde oybirli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2008\/1-172<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2009\/26<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 17.2.2009<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u2022 KASTEN \u00d6LD\u00dcRME ( San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Oturumda Haz\u0131r Bulunmamas\u0131 Halinde H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00d6nce Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan M\u00fcdafiiye Verilece\u011fi )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 SON S\u00d6Z HAKKI ( San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Oturumda Haz\u0131r Bulunmamas\u0131 Halinde H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00d6nce Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan M\u00fcdafiiye Verilmesi Gere\u011fi )<\/p>\n

    \n
    \n

    ( San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Oturumda Haz\u0131r Bulunmamas\u0131 Halinde H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00d6nce Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan M\u00fcdafiiye Verilmemesinin Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Oldu\u011fu ) 5271\/m.226 5237\/m.81<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ZET : <\/b>Kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n oturumda haz\u0131r bulunmamas\u0131 halinde h\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z\u00fcn, haz\u0131r bulunan m\u00fcdafie verilmesi zorunludur. Savunma hakk\u0131 ile yak\u0131ndan ilgili bulunan bu zorunlulu\u011fa uyulmamas\u0131 yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>Kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan san\u0131k \u0130sa \u00c7.’\u0131n 765 say\u0131l\u0131 TCY’n\u0131n 449\/1, 59, 31 ve 33. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 30 y\u0131l hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin Osmaniye A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 17.01.2006 g\u00fcn ve 80-3 say\u0131l\u0131 resen temyize tabi olan h\u00fck\u00fcm, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan da temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesinin 27.06.2007 g\u00fcn ve 2006\/7197-5238 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “… Olay g\u00fcn\u00fc maktul\u00fcn evinde \u00f6l\u00fc olarak bulundu\u011fu, 24.03.2004 tarihli \u00f6l\u00fc muayene tutana\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6re saat 22.00-23.00 aras\u0131nda \u00f6lm\u00fc\u015f olabilece\u011finin belirtildi\u011fi, tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na g\u00f6re muhtemelen \u00f6l\u00fcm saatinde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n karde\u015fleri ile birlikte i\u015fletti\u011fi lokantada ve tan\u0131k Suat’\u0131n b\u00fcfesinde oldu\u011fu, saat 23.00 civar\u0131nda maktul\u00fcn eve gelen \u00e7ocuklar\u0131n\u0131n cesedi buldu\u011fu, yengeleri olan tan\u0131k Dursel’e haber verdikleri, tan\u0131k Dursel’in, ilk bak\u0131\u015fta maktul\u00fcn d\u00fc\u015ft\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc sanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 lokantaya telefon a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n karde\u015fi Abdullah’a eve gelmelerini s\u00f6yledi\u011fi, bu s\u0131rada lokantada olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n da \u00f6l\u00fcm olay\u0131ndan bu \u015fekilde haberdar oldu\u011fu, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n a\u015famalardaki inkara y\u00f6nelik savunmalar\u0131na, savunmay\u0131 do\u011frulayan tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na, fenni kan\u0131tlara, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n o\u011flu olan 8 ya\u015f\u0131ndaki tan\u0131k Halil Mert \u00c7.’\u0131n 27.06.2005 tarihli ke\u015fifte tan\u0131kl\u0131ktan \u00e7ekildi\u011fi, \u00f6nceki beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n birbirleriyle \u00e7eli\u015fkili oldu\u011fu, olay\u0131n g\u00f6rg\u00fc tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi maktul\u00fcn t\u0131rnak aras\u0131 svaplar\u0131ndan al\u0131nan numunenin, san\u0131k ve maktulden ba\u015fka \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc bir ki\u015fiye ait oldu\u011funun belirlendi\u011fi, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n e\u015fi olan maktul\u00fc \u00f6ld\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne dair mahkumiyetine yetecek kesin ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil de olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmakla beraat\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekirken yetersiz gerek\u00e7elerle mahkumiyetine karar verilmesi…”,<\/p>\n

    \u0130sabetsizli\u011finde bozulmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkeme ise 29.11.2007 g\u00fcn ve 96-248 say\u0131 ile ilk h\u00fckm\u00fcnde direnmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Resen temyize tabi olan bu h\u00fckm\u00fcn de Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131 ve san\u0131k m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosya, Yarg\u0131tay C.Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 19.06.2008 g\u00fcn ve 105541 say\u0131l\u0131 “bozma” istekli tebli\u011fnamesi ile Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilmekle, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n

    KARAR : <\/b>5320 say\u0131l\u0131 Yasan\u0131n 8. maddesi uyar\u0131nca y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olan 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CYUY’n\u0131n 318. maddesinde, Ceza Genel Kurulunda incelemenin duru\u015fmal\u0131 yap\u0131labilece\u011fine ili\u015fkin bir h\u00fck\u00fcm yer almad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiinin temyiz incelemesinin duru\u015fmal\u0131 olarak yap\u0131lmas\u0131na dair isteminin CYUY’n\u0131n 318. maddesi uyar\u0131nca reddine karar verildikten sonra dosya \u00fczerinden yap\u0131lan incelemede;<\/p>\n

    Resmi nikahl\u0131 e\u015fi Serap \u00c7.’\u0131 kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan san\u0131k \u0130sa \u00c7.’\u0131n, mahkumiyetine karar verilen somut olayda \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fc gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7u i\u015fleyip i\u015flemedi\u011fi noktas\u0131nda toplanmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu de\u011ferlendirilmeden \u00f6nce, direnme karar\u0131n\u0131n usul\u00fcne uygun olarak verilip verilmedi\u011finin saptanmas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130ncelenen dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n

    Bozmadan sonra san\u0131k ve kat\u0131lana usul\u00fcne uygun olarak davetiye tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f, san\u0131k 30.10.2007 tarihli oturuma kat\u0131larak m\u00fcdafii huzurunda bozma ilam\u0131na uyulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. Oturum C.Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n dosyay\u0131 inceleyip m\u00fctalaa beyan\u0131 i\u00e7in 29.11.2009 tarihine ertelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu oturuma san\u0131k kat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafii ve kat\u0131lan vekili i\u015ftirak etmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme \u00f6nce san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiine, sonra kat\u0131lan vekiline, en son da C.Savc\u0131s\u0131na bozma konusunda diyeceklerini sorarak bozma ilam\u0131na direnilmesine ara karar \u015feklinde karar vermi\u015f, sonra da kimseye s\u00f6z vermeden duru\u015fmay\u0131 bitirerek direnme h\u00fckm\u00fc kurmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

    1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CYUY’n\u0131n 251. maddesine paralel bir d\u00fczenleme getiren 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CYY’n\u0131n “delillerin tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 216. maddesinde; ” ( 1 ) Ortaya konulan delillerle ilgili tart\u0131\u015fmada s\u00f6z, s\u0131ras\u0131yla kat\u0131lana veya vekiline, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131na, san\u0131\u011fa ve m\u00fcdafiine veya kanuni temsilcisine verilir.<\/p>\n

    ( 2 ) Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, kat\u0131lan veya vekili, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, m\u00fcdafiinin veya kanuni temsilcisinin a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131na; san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafii ya da kanuni temsilcisi de Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n ve kat\u0131lan\u0131n veya vekilinin a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131na cevap verebilir.<\/p>\n

    ( 3 ) H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilir.” h\u00fckm\u00fc bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu maddenin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ortaya konulan kan\u0131tlarla ilgili tart\u0131\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunan taraflara hangi s\u0131raya g\u00f6re s\u00f6z verilece\u011fi, ikinci f\u0131krada taraflara tan\u0131nan kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131kl\u0131 cevap hakk\u0131 d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f, son f\u0131krada da son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilece\u011fi kural\u0131 getirilmi\u015f bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Savunma hakk\u0131 Anayasam\u0131z\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131narak, herkesin me\u015fru vas\u0131ta ve yollardan yararlanmak suretiyle yarg\u0131 mercileri \u00f6n\u00fcnde davac\u0131 veya daval\u0131 olarak iddia ve savunma hakk\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. San\u0131k bu hakk\u0131n\u0131 bizzat kullanabilece\u011fi gibi m\u00fcdafii ile de kullanabilir. Nitekim \u00fclkemizin de kabul etti\u011fi \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Avrupa S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n asgari ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steren 6. maddesinin 3\/c bendinde; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, m\u00fcdafii tayin etme yetkisi ile belirli ko\u015fullarda m\u00fcdafiiden \u00fccretsiz yararlanabilme hakk\u0131 bulundu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu a\u00e7\u0131dan, savunma hakk\u0131 “me\u015fru bir yol”, m\u00fcdafii de savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan “me\u015fru bir ara\u00e7t\u0131r”.<\/p>\n

    5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CYY’n\u0131n 2\/1-c maddesinde; \u015f\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapan avukat olarak tan\u0131mlanan m\u00fcdafii, ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131n\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten makamlar \u00f6n\u00fcnde \u015f\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n savunulmas\u0131 g\u00f6revini \u00fcstlenen ve baz\u0131 niteliklere sahip olmas\u0131 gereken \u015f\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yard\u0131mc\u0131s\u0131d\u0131r ( CENTEL\/ZAFER, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 6. bas\u0131, Beta Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, \u0130stanbul, 2008, s.159, \u00d6ZT\u00dcRK\/ERDEM, Uygulamal\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 9. bas\u0131, Se\u00e7kin Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, Ankara, 2006, s.310-311 ).<\/p>\n

    1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CYUY ki\u015fisel savunmada kural olarak ihtiyari m\u00fcdafiilik sistemini benimsemi\u015f, s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 baz\u0131 hallerde ise ki\u015filerin kendilerini yeterince savunamayacaklar\u0131 ve kamusal bir kurum olan savunman\u0131n zaafa u\u011frayaca\u011f\u0131 kabul\u00fcnden hareketle zorunlu m\u00fcdafiilik sistemini getirmi\u015ftir. 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CYY ise zorunlu m\u00fcdafiilik sistemini, istisna olmaktan \u00e7\u0131kararak adeta kural haline getirecek derecede geni\u015fletmi\u015ftir. Bu Yasaya g\u00f6re; m\u00fcdafii bulunmayan \u015f\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, \u00e7ocuk, kendini savunamayacak derecede malul veya sa\u011f\u0131r ve dilsiz olmas\u0131 ( 150\/2. md. ), soru\u015fturma veya kovu\u015fturma konusu su\u00e7un cezas\u0131n\u0131n alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131n 5 y\u0131ldan fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmesi ( 150\/3. md. ), resmi bir kurumda kusur yetene\u011finin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in g\u00f6zlem alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar verilecek olmas\u0131 ( 74\/2. md. ), tutuklama talebiyle mahkemeye sevkedilmesi ( 101\/3. md. ), davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 nedeniyle haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 halinde duru\u015fman\u0131n d\u00fczenli olarak y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesini tehlikeye sokan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yoklu\u011funda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ( 204\/1. md. ) ve ka\u00e7ak san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ( 247\/3. md. ) hallerinde m\u00fcdafii g\u00f6revlendirme zorunlulu\u011fu bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Ayn\u0131 Yasan\u0131n, 147. maddesinde; \u015f\u00fcphelinin m\u00fcdafii se\u00e7me hakk\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, onun hukuki yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanabilece\u011fi, m\u00fcdafiin ifade veya sorgusunda haz\u0131r bulunabilece\u011fini kendisine bildirilmesi gerekti\u011fi, 148. maddesinde; m\u00fcdafii haz\u0131r bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n kolluk\u00e7a al\u0131nan ifadenin, hakim veya mahkeme huzurunda \u015f\u00fcpheli veya san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan do\u011frulanmad\u0131k\u00e7a h\u00fckme esas al\u0131namayaca\u011f\u0131, 149. maddesinde; \u015f\u00fcphelinin, soru\u015fturman\u0131n her a\u015famas\u0131nda bir veya birden fazla m\u00fcdafiin yard\u0131m\u0131ndan yararlanabilece\u011fi, avukat\u0131n \u015f\u00fcpheli ile g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fme, ifade alma veya sorgu s\u00fcresince yan\u0131nda olma ve hukuki yard\u0131mda bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n engellenemeyece\u011fi ve k\u0131s\u0131tlanamayaca\u011f\u0131, 153. maddesinde; m\u00fcdafiin, soru\u015fturma evresinde dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fini inceleyebilece\u011fi ve istedi\u011fi belgelerin bir \u00f6rne\u011fini har\u00e7s\u0131z olarak alabilece\u011fi, \u015f\u00fcphelinin ifadesini i\u00e7eren tutanak ile bilirki\u015fi raporlar\u0131 ve \u015f\u00fcphelinin haz\u0131r bulunmaya yetkili olduklar\u0131 di\u011fer adli i\u015flemlere ili\u015fkin tutanaklar hakk\u0131nda k\u0131s\u0131tlama yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131, 154. maddesinde; \u015f\u00fcphelinin vekaletname aranmaks\u0131z\u0131n m\u00fcdafii ile her zaman ve konu\u015fulanlar\u0131 ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n duyamayaca\u011f\u0131 bir ortamda g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015febilece\u011fi h\u00fckme ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    \u00d6te yandan CYY’n\u0131n su\u00e7 niteli\u011finin de\u011fi\u015fmesi durumunda ek savunma hakk\u0131 verilmesine ili\u015fkin 226. maddesinin 4. f\u0131kras\u0131nda, ek savunma hakk\u0131na ili\u015fkin yaz\u0131l\u0131 bildirimlerin varsa m\u00fcdafie yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 belirtildikten sonra “m\u00fcdafii san\u0131\u011fa tan\u0131nan haklardan onun gibi yararlan\u0131r” h\u00fckm\u00fc getirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

    San\u0131\u011f\u0131n yoklu\u011funda ya da yan\u0131nda, duru\u015fmada onu temsil eden m\u00fcdafiine “son s\u00f6z hakk\u0131” verilece\u011fine ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131k bir usul kural\u0131, gerek 1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CYUY’nda gerekse 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CYY’nda yer almamaktad\u0131r. Ancak ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 yasas\u0131n\u0131n her konuyu ayr\u0131nt\u0131s\u0131yla d\u00fczenlemesi beklenmemelidir. Bu nedenle usul yasalar\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenlemedi\u011fi alanlar ki\u015fi hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olmamak ve yasan\u0131n ruhuna uygun olmak ko\u015fuluyla yorum ve k\u0131yasla doldurulabilmektedir.<\/p>\n

    5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CYY’n\u0131n 226\/4. maddesinde ek savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n verilmesi konusunda, m\u00fcdafiin san\u0131\u011fa tan\u0131nan haklardan onun gibi yararlanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin getirilen kural\u0131n, olay\u0131m\u0131zda da k\u0131yasen uygulanma olana\u011f\u0131 bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bunun sonucu olarak ta CYY’n\u0131n 216\/3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n oturumda haz\u0131r bulunmamas\u0131 halinde h\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z\u00fcn, haz\u0131r bulunan m\u00fcdafie verilmesi zorunludur. Savunma hakk\u0131 ile yak\u0131ndan ilgili bulunan bu zorunlulu\u011fa uyulmamas\u0131 yasaya mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r. Ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en \u00f6nemli hakk\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131 olup, bu hak hi\u00e7bir \u015fekilde k\u0131s\u0131tlanamaz.<\/p>\n

    Bu itibarla, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 son oturumda C.Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n beyan\u0131n\u0131n tespitinden sonra haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiine son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup, yerel mahkeme direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin, belirtilen usul yan\u0131lg\u0131s\u0131 nedeniyle bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    \u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan bir k\u0131s\u0131m Kurul \u00dcyeleri ise “san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yoklu\u011funda onu temsil eden m\u00fcdafiine h\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmesine gerek bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle kar\u015f\u0131 oy kullanm\u0131\u015flard\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : <\/b>A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

    1- Osmaniye 1. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin 29.11.2007 g\u00fcn ve 96-248 say\u0131l\u0131 direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn belirtilen usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k nedeniyle sair y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n

    2- Dosyan\u0131n mahalline g\u00f6nderilmesi i\u00e7in Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 10.02.2009 g\u00fcn\u00fc yap\u0131lan birinci m\u00fczakerede yasal \u00e7o\u011funluk sa\u011flanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan 17.02.2009 g\u00fcn\u00fc yap\u0131lan ikinci m\u00fczakerede oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    5. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2013\/6783<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2015\/8275<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 16.3.2015<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u2022 G\u00d6REV\u0130 K\u00d6T\u00dcYE KULLANMA ( H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00d6nce Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131\u011fa Verilece\u011fi – Karar\u0131n Verildi\u011fi Oturumda Haz\u0131r Olan San\u0131klar\u0131n M\u00fcdafiilerinden Son S\u00f6zleri Sorulmadan Karar Verilemeyece\u011fi )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 SANIK M\u00dcDAF\u0130\u0130LER\u0130NDEN SON S\u00d6ZLER\u0130 SORULMADAN KARAR VER\u0130LMES\u0130<\/span> ( H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00d6nce Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131\u011fa Verilece\u011fi – Karar\u0131n Verildi\u011fi Oturumda Haz\u0131r Olan San\u0131klar\u0131n M\u00fcdafiilerinden Son S\u00f6zleri Sorulmadan Karar Verilemeyece\u011fi\/G\u00f6revi K\u00f6t\u00fcye Kullanma )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 DEL\u0130LLER\u0130N TARTI\u015eILMASI ( G\u00f6revi K\u00f6t\u00fcye Kullanma – H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00d6nce Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131\u011fa Verilece\u011fi\/Karar\u0131n Verildi\u011fi Oturumda Haz\u0131r Olan San\u0131klar\u0131n M\u00fcdafiilerinden Son S\u00f6zleri Sorulmadan Karar Verilemeyece\u011fi )<\/p>\n

    5237\/m. 257<\/p>\n

    5271\/m. 216\/3<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ZET : <\/b>San\u0131klar\u0131n g\u00f6revlerini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131klar\u0131 iddia edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilir. Karar\u0131n verildi\u011fi oturumda haz\u0131r olan san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafiilerinden son s\u00f6zlerinin sorulmamas\u0131 suretiyle yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131 isabetsizdir.<\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>Mahalli mahkemece verilen h\u00fck\u00fcmler temyiz edilmekle dosya incelenerek, gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n

    KARAR : <\/b>San\u0131klardan F. A.’\u0131n Ku\u015fadas\u0131 Belediye Ba\u015fkan\u0131, san\u0131k E. S.’\u0131n belediye meclis \u00fcyesi ve ba\u015fkan vekili, san\u0131k H. A.’\u0131n zab\u0131ta m\u00fcd\u00fcr vekili, san\u0131k M. T.’\u0131n ise zab\u0131ta g\u00f6revlisi olarak g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131klar\u0131, olay tarihinde san\u0131k F. A.’\u0131n, san\u0131klardan E. S.’\u0131n y\u00f6nlendirmesiyle di\u011fer san\u0131klara Ku\u015fadas\u0131 liman giri\u015finde bulunan kat\u0131lan \u015firkete ait b\u00fcronun \u00f6n\u00fcne dan\u0131\u015fma masas\u0131 konulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in talimat verdi\u011fi, dan\u0131\u015fma masas\u0131nda g\u00f6rev yapan san\u0131k M. T.’\u0131n, limanda inen turistleri taksicilere y\u00f6nlendirerek, 1618 Say\u0131l\u0131 Yasaya uygun \u015fekilde turizm acenteli\u011fi yapan kat\u0131lan \u015firketin faaliyetini engelledi\u011fi, bu suretle san\u0131klar\u0131n g\u00f6revlerini k\u00f6t\u00fcye kulland\u0131klar\u0131 iddia edilen olayda;<\/p>\n

    Ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131, Ceza Genel Kurulunun 17.2.2009 g\u00fcn ve 2008\/1-172 Esas, 2009\/26 Say\u0131l\u0131 Karar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, karar\u0131n verildi\u011fi oturumda haz\u0131r olan san\u0131klar F. A. ve H. A. m\u00fcdafiilerindenson s\u00f6zlerinin sorulmamas\u0131 suretiyle C.M.K.n\u0131n 216\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    Ayd\u0131n Valili\u011fi’nin g\u00f6revlendirmesi \u00fczerine 31.7.2008 tarihli ara\u015ft\u0131rma raporunu d\u00fczenleyen kontrol memurunca beyanlar\u0131na ba\u015fvurulan ve esasa etkili anlat\u0131mda bulunan profesyonel turist rehberleri E. S., G. K., Y.T. G., T. B., S. A., A. \u015e., N. \u00c7., \u00c7. G. ve B. H. T.’ la di\u011fer g\u00f6revliler O. P., R. B. ve \u00d6. Y.’in mahkemece y\u00f6ntemince \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131larak tan\u0131k s\u0131fat\u0131yla dinlenmelerinden sonra san\u0131klar\u0131n hukuki durumlar\u0131n\u0131n tayin ve takdiri gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden eksik inceleme ve yetersiz gerek\u00e7elerle yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde beraat kararlar\u0131 verilmesi,<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : <\/b>Kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131, kat\u0131lan vekilinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu itibarla yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanunun 8\/1. maddesi g\u00f6zetilerek C.M.U.K.n\u0131n 321. maddesi uyar\u0131nca BOZULMASINA, 16.03.2015 tarihinde oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2014\/1-170<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2015\/20<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 3.3.2015<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u2022 SANI\u011eA SON S\u00d6Z\u00dc SORULMAMASI SURET\u0130YLE SAVUNMA HAKKININ KISITLANIP KISITLANMADI\u011eI<\/span> ( Bozmadan Sonra Yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n Bozma \u0130lam\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc A\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan Sonra Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n Bitirilerek H\u00fckm\u00fcn Tefhim Edildi\u011fi – Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n S\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 Sonucunu Do\u011furan Bu Usule Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k Nedeniyle Direnme Karar\u0131nda \u0130sabet Bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 SAVUNMA HAKKININ KISITLANMASI<\/span> ( Bozmadan Sonra Yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n Bozma \u0130lam\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc A\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan Sonra Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n Bitirilerek H\u00fckm\u00fcn Tefhim Edildi\u011fi – Direnme H\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131\u011fa Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Verilmemesi \u0130sabetsizli\u011finden Bozulaca\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 D\u0130RENME H\u00dcKM\u00dcN\u00dcN HAZIR BULUNAN SANI\u011eA SON S\u00d6Z\u00dcN VER\u0130LMEMES\u0130 \u0130SABETS\u0130ZL\u0130\u011e\u0130NDEN BOZULMASI ( Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n K\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 – Bozmadan Sonra Yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n Bozma \u0130lam\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc A\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan Sonra Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n Bitirilerek H\u00fckm\u00fcn Tefhim Edildi\u011fi\/San\u0131\u011fa Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Verilmemesinin Bozma Nedeni Oldu\u011fu )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 HAZIR BULUNAN SANI\u011eA SON S\u00d6Z\u00dcN\u00dcN SORULMASI \/ SAVUNMA HAKKI ( Bozmadan Sonra Yap\u0131lan Yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet Savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n Bozma \u0130lam\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc A\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan Sonra Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n Bitirilerek H\u00fckm\u00fcn Tefhim Edilmesinin 5271 S. C.M.K.’nun 216\/3. Md. Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k Olu\u015fturdu\u011fu ) 5271\/m.216\/3<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ZET : <\/b>uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fc sorulmamas\u0131 suretiyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlan\u0131p k\u0131s\u0131tlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir. Bozmadan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bozma ilam\u0131na ili\u015fkin g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan sonra yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilerek h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fundan, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furan bu usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k nedeniyle yerel mahkeme direnme karar\u0131nda isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Bu itibarla, direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi isabetsizli\u011finden di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    DAVA :<\/strong> San\u0131k K. A. hakk\u0131nda olas\u0131 kastla \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 neticesinde eylemin bilin\u00e7li taksirle \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kabul edilerek 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 85\/1, 22\/3, 31\/3, 62 ve 54. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 5 y\u0131l hapis cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve m\u00fcsadereye ili\u015fkin, \u00c7ar\u015famba A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 19.10.2011 g\u00fcn ve 285-179 say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k m\u00fcdafii, kat\u0131lanlar vekili ve Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesinin 26.12.2012 g\u00fcn ve 2012\/4421 – 9985 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    \u201c… San\u0131\u011f\u0131n kalabal\u0131k ni\u015fan t\u00f6reni s\u0131ras\u0131nda, hedef g\u00f6zetmeksizin, iki-\u00fc\u00e7 el tabancayla havaya ate\u015f etti\u011fi s\u0131rada, \u00e7evrede bulunan ki\u015fi ya da ki\u015filerin de isabet al\u0131p yaralanabilece\u011fini ya da \u00f6lebilece\u011fini \u00f6ng\u00f6rmesine ra\u011fmen, at\u0131\u015flar\u0131na devam etti\u011fi, bir ara tabancan\u0131n tutukluk yapmas\u0131 nedeniyle tabancay\u0131 yere parelele yak\u0131n vaziyette tuttu\u011fu ve bu s\u0131rada da teti\u011fe basmak suretiyle yeniden ate\u015f eden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, kendisine yakla\u015f\u0131k 5,5 metre mesafede, sandalye \u00fczerinde oturan ve aralar\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir husumet bulunmayan maktul\u00fc ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesinden tek isabetle vurup \u00f6ld\u00fcrmesi eyleminde, olas\u0131 kastla hareket etti\u011finin kabul\u00fc gerekti\u011fi halde, su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek bilin\u00e7li taksirle insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131…”,<\/p>\n

    \u0130sabetsizli\u011finden bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkeme ise 27.02.2013 g\u00fcn ve 28-35 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    \u201c… \u0130lk olarak maktul\u00fcn \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne y\u00f6nelik eylemin nitelemesini yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131m\u0131zda; gerek SS\u00c7’nin a\u015famalardaki anlat\u0131m\u0131, gerek tan\u0131k Bilal Kapkara’n\u0131n ‘Kadir silah\u0131 havaya do\u011fru kald\u0131rd\u0131, 2 veya 3 el havaya do\u011fru ate\u015f etti, 2-3 el ate\u015f edince silah tutukluk yapt\u0131, bunun \u00fczerine Kadir tabancay\u0131 yukar\u0131dan indirerek bel hizas\u0131na yere parelel \u015fekilde indirdi, bu s\u0131rada namlu kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6steriyordu, di\u011fer eliyle tabancan\u0131n oldu\u011fu ele hi\u00e7 temas olmaks\u0131z\u0131n tabancay\u0131 tuttu\u011fu elinin i\u015faret parma\u011f\u0131 teti\u011fe dokundu ve silah ate\u015f ald\u0131, bu s\u0131rada birinin vuruldu\u011funu s\u00f6ylediler’ \u015feklindeki beyan\u0131, tan\u0131k Mehmet Kaya’n\u0131n ‘bir anda bakt\u0131\u011f\u0131mda havaya iki el ate\u015f etti, sonra tabancay\u0131 yere \u00e7apraz vaziyette tuttu, yani namlunun ucu yere \u00e7apraz vaziyette bak\u0131yordu, tek eliyle silah\u0131 tutuyordu, namluyu yere do\u011fru tuttu\u011funda bir patlama sesi daha duydum’ \u015feklindeki beyan\u0131, dosyadaki maddi deliller ve otopsi raporu, olay yeri inceleme raporu birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde; SS\u00c7’nin kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7unu ya da olas\u0131 kas\u0131t ile adam \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fine dair delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, olas\u0131 kas\u0131t ile adam \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7unun olu\u015fmas\u0131 i\u00e7in SS\u00c7’nin ‘olursa olsun – \u00f6l\u00fcrse \u00f6ls\u00fcn’ mant\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile hareket ederek herhangi birine hedef g\u00f6zetmeksizin, ancak birilerinin de muhtemel \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc sonucunu do\u011furacak \u015fekilde kasten at\u0131\u015f yapmas\u0131n\u0131n gerekli oldu\u011fu; \u00f6rneklemek gerekir ise SS\u00c7’nin ni\u015fan s\u0131ras\u0131ndaki kalabal\u0131\u011f\u0131 hi\u00e7e sayarak topluluk i\u00e7erisinden bulundu\u011fu yere g\u00f6re y\u00fcksekte olan balkon, tepelik, dam gibi yerlere de isabet edebilecek \u015fekilde oralarda da insanlar oldu\u011funu bilerek ate\u015f etmesi halinde ve birinin isabet almas\u0131 halinde olas\u0131 kast\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahsedilebilece\u011fi, yine bir Yarg\u0131tay karar\u0131nda oldu\u011fu gibi ki\u015finin balkona \u00e7\u0131k\u0131p \u00fcst kat balkonununda birilerinin oldu\u011funu da bilmesi gerekti\u011fi halde balkondan yukar\u0131 do\u011fru ate\u015f etmesi sonucu \u00fcst balkondaki ki\u015finin isabet almas\u0131nda olas\u0131 kast\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahsedilebilece\u011fi, yine d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden \u00f6rnek verecek olursak; kalabal\u0131k bir d\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnde \u015fahs\u0131n sarho\u015f vaziyette elindeki silah\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011fa sola do\u011fru rastgele ate\u015flemesinde olas\u0131 kast\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilebilece\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmekle olay\u0131m\u0131zda verilen \u00f6rneklerinin hi\u00e7 birisine uygun bir durum bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kez\u00e2 SS\u00c7’nin tabancan\u0131n tutukluk yapmas\u0131ndan sonraki davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n\u0131n eyleminin kasten yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir eylem olarak de\u011ferlendirilemeyece\u011fi, ancak a\u011f\u0131r bir kusurluluk durumundan s\u00f6z edilebilece\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, mekanizmada mermi bulunan silah\u0131 bu \u015fekilde kalabal\u0131\u011f\u0131n oldu\u011fu tarafa do\u011fru tutmas\u0131n\u0131n ve tutukluluk durumunu bu \u015fekilde gidermeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n ‘neticenin \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ancak istenmedi\u011fi’ bir hukuki stat\u00fcye uygunluk g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi…\u201d,<\/p>\n

    Gerek\u00e7esi ile \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnilmesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu h\u00fckm\u00fcn de Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ve kat\u0131lan Cengiz Beyazo\u011flu vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine, Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n \u201cbozma\u201d istekli 12.03.2014 g\u00fcn ve 138036 say\u0131l\u0131 tebli\u011fnamesi ile Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n

    KARAR : San\u0131k H. A. hakk\u0131nda olas\u0131 kastla \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan kurulan beraat h\u00fckm\u00fc onanmak suretiyle kesinle\u015fmi\u015f ve san\u0131k K. A. hakk\u0131nda 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k ve genel g\u00fcvenli\u011fin kasten tehlikeye sokulmas\u0131 su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davalar\u0131n\u0131n tefrikine karar verilmi\u015f olup, inceleme san\u0131k Kadir hakk\u0131nda bilin\u00e7li taksirle \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7undan kurulan h\u00fck\u00fcmle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olarak yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    \u00d6zel Daire ile yerel mahkeme aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bir ki\u015finin \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne neden olma eylemini olas\u0131 kastla m\u0131, bilin\u00e7li taksirle mi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011finin belirlenmesine ili\u015fkin ise de, Yarg\u0131tay \u0130\u00e7 Y\u00f6netmeli\u011finin 27. maddesi uyar\u0131nca \u00f6ncelikle direnme h\u00fckm\u00fc kurulurken haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fcn sorulmamas\u0131 suretiyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlan\u0131p s\u0131n\u0131rlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

    \u00d6zel Dairenin bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra yerel mahkemece san\u0131\u011f\u0131n da haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu duru\u015fmada, bozma ilam\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 \u00f6nce kat\u0131lanlar ve vekillerinin diyeceklerinin tespit edildi\u011fi, sonra san\u0131ktan soruldu\u011funda, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u201cavukat\u0131m beyanda bulunacakt\u0131r\u201d \u015feklinde a\u00e7\u0131klama yapmas\u0131 \u00fczerine san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiine s\u00f6z verildi\u011fi, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiinin “direnilmesine karar verilsin” \u015feklindeki beyan\u0131n\u0131n ard\u0131ndan en son iddia makam\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcn al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa “son s\u00f6z” hakk\u0131 tan\u0131nmadan duru\u015fmaya son verilip direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn kuruldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    1412 say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 251. maddesine paralel d\u00fczenlemeler i\u00e7eren 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216. maddesinin son f\u0131kras\u0131nda; \u201cH\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilir\u201d d\u00fczenlemesi yer almaktad\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm gere\u011fince kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu takdirde son s\u00f6z mutlaka san\u0131\u011fa verilerek duru\u015fma bitirilecektir. Ceza Genel Kurulunun 03.06.2014 g\u00fcn ve 1207-309; 29.01.2013 g\u00fcn ve 1406-30; 28.04.2009 g\u00fcn ve 77-111; 29.01.2008 g\u00fcn ve 193-7; 04.12.2007 g\u00fcn ve 246-261; 25.04.2006 g\u00fcn ve 3-124 ile 06.07.2004 g\u00fcn ve 138-159; say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere; savunma hakk\u0131 ile yak\u0131ndan ilgili bulunan bu usul kural\u0131 emredici nitelikte olup, uyulmamas\u0131 kanuna mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r. Ceza muhakemesinde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en \u00f6nemli hakk\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131 olup, haz\u0131r oldu\u011fu oturumda son s\u00f6z san\u0131\u011fa verilmeden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Temyiz merciince verilen bozma kararlar\u0131ndan sonra ilk derece mahkemelerince yarg\u0131lamaya devam olundu\u011funda dava hen\u00fcz sonu\u00e7lanmam\u0131\u015f bulundu\u011fundan, ilk defa h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulurken \u201cson s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi\u201d kural\u0131, bozmadan sonra ba\u015flayan yarg\u0131lamada da kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n kesintisizlik ve s\u00fcreklilik ilkesinin do\u011fal sonucu olarak aynen ge\u00e7erlidir. Kovu\u015fturman\u0131nsona erdirilmesi ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn tesis ve tefhimine ge\u00e7ilmesi \u00f6ncesinde, son konu\u015fan taraf\u0131n haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131k olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi \u015feklinde anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken \u201cen son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011faverilmesi” kural\u0131na uyulmamas\u0131, bu durumlarda da 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Nitekim \u00f6\u011fretide; “Son s\u00f6z san\u0131\u011f\u0131nd\u0131r. Son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi, m\u00fcdafaa bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00e7ok \u00f6nemlidir. Bunun i\u00e7indir ki son s\u00f6z\u00fcn haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilmemesi mutlak temyiz sebebi ( hukuka kesin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k ) ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bozma sebebi say\u0131lmaktad\u0131r” ( Nurullah Kunter, Feridun Yenisey, Ay\u015fe Nuho\u011flu, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 18. Bas\u0131, Beta Yay\u0131nlar\u0131, \u0130stanbul 2014, s. 1484 ); “H\u00fck\u00fcm ( karar ) safhas\u0131na ge\u00e7meden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilmek zorundad\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm ( CMK’nun 216\/3 ) silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve su\u00e7suzluk karinesi ilkelerinin bir gere\u011fi olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f ve uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu emredici bir h\u00fck\u00fcmd\u00fcr… Son s\u00f6z hakk\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi, bozmadan sonraki yarg\u0131lamada da uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu bir usul kural\u0131d\u0131r.” ( Yener \u00dcnver, Hakan Hakeri, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 7. Bas\u0131, Adalet Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara 2013, cilt: 2, s. 146 ve 149 ) \u015feklinde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmek suretiyle, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011famutlaka son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmesi gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi ittifakla benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

    Bozmadan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bozma ilam\u0131na ili\u015fkin g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan sonra yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilerek h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’nun 216\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fundan, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furan bu usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k nedeniyle yerel mahkeme direnme karar\u0131nda isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Bu itibarla, direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi isabetsizli\u011finden di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

    1- ) \u00c7ar\u015famba A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinin 27.02.2013 g\u00fcn ve 28-35 say\u0131l\u0131 direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi isabetsizli\u011finden di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n

    2- ) Dosyan\u0131n, mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 03.03.2015 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2012\/11-1207<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2014\/309<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 3.6.2014<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    \u2022 N\u0130TEL\u0130KL\u0130 DOLANDIRICILIK SU\u00c7U ( Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n K\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 – Yarg\u0131laman\u0131n Bitirilmesinden \u00d6nce Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131klara Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Verilmemesi 5271 S. CMK’nun 216\/3. Md.sine Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k Olu\u015fturdu\u011fundan Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n S\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 Sonucunu Do\u011furan Bu Usule Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k Sebebiyle Yerel Mahkeme Direnme Karar\u0131nda \u0130sabet Bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 SAVUNMA HAKKININ KISITLANMASI<\/span> ( Nitelikli Doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k Su\u00e7u – \u0130lk Defa H\u00fck\u00fcm Kurulurken Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn San\u0131\u011fa Verilmesi Kural\u0131 Bozmadan Sonra Ba\u015flayan Yarg\u0131lamada da Kamu Davas\u0131n\u0131n Kesintisizlik ve S\u00fcreklilik \u0130lkesinin Do\u011fal Sonucu Olarak Aynen Ge\u00e7erli Oldu\u011fu )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 SON S\u00d6Z\u00dcN SANI\u011eA VER\u0130LMES\u0130<\/span> ( Nitelikli Doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k Su\u00e7u – Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131\u011fa Verilmemesi Mutlak Temyiz Sebebi ve Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla Bozma Sebebi Say\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 )<\/p>\n

    \u2022 S\u0130LAHLARIN E\u015e\u0130TL\u0130\u011e\u0130 \u0130LKES\u0130<\/span> ( Nitelikli Doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k Su\u00e7u – H\u00fck\u00fcm Safhas\u0131na Ge\u00e7meden \u00d6nce Son S\u00f6z\u00fcn Haz\u0131r Bulunan San\u0131\u011fa Verilmek Zorunda Oldu\u011fu )<\/p>\n

    5237\/m.157\/1,255<\/p>\n

    5271\/m.216\/3<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ZET : San\u0131klar hakk\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclen dava nitelikli doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7una ili\u015fkindir. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bozma ilam\u0131na ve san\u0131klar\u0131n tutukluluk durumlar\u0131na dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan sonra yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilerek h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilmesinden \u00f6nce haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun216\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fundan, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furan bu usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k sebebiyle yerel mahkeme direnme karar\u0131nda isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    DAVA : Nitelikli doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7undan a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 sonucunda eylemlerin yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir i\u015f i\u00e7in yarar sa\u011flama su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kabul edilerek san\u0131klar\u0131n 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 255\/1, 62 ve 52. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 11’er kez 1 y\u0131l 15 g\u00fcn hapis ve \u00e7e\u015fitli miktarlarda adli para cezalar\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin, Kar\u015f\u0131yaka 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 26.5.2009 g\u00fcn ve 54-167 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, san\u0131klar ve m\u00fcdafileri taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 11. Ceza Dairesinin 29.6.2010 g\u00fcn ve 2010\/1199-7632 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “… Kar\u015f\u0131yaka \u0130l\u00e7esi Belediye Meclis \u00dcyesi olan san\u0131k N. A. ile S. S.’in yeniden d\u00fczenlenen Bostanl\u0131 pazar yerinde yirmi adet yerin kontenjan olarak Kar\u015f\u0131yaka Spor Kul\u00fcb\u00fcne ayr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, kendilerinin de bu yerleri tahsis etmekle g\u00f6revli ve yetkili olduklar\u0131n\u0131, i\u015fi yapacaklar\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyerek kat\u0131lanlardan para almaktan ibaret eylemlerin su\u00e7 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 157\/1. maddesindeki su\u00e7u olu\u015fturdu\u011fu g\u00f6zetilmeden yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde karar verilmesi…”,<\/p>\n

    \u0130sabetsizli\u011finden bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkeme ise 14.9.2010 g\u00fcn ve 232-224 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “… T.C.K.nun 255. maddesinin gerek\u00e7esinde a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ‘Kamu g\u00f6revlisinin g\u00f6revine girmeyen ve yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir i\u015fi yapabilece\u011fi veya yapt\u0131rabilece\u011finden bahisle ki\u015fiden menfaat temin etmesi, ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z bir su\u00e7 olarak tan\u0131mlanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu su\u00e7un olu\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in, menfaati temin eden ki\u015finin, yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 arzulad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015fin kamu g\u00f6revlisinin g\u00f6revine girmedi\u011fini ve bu hususta yetkisi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bilmesi gerekir. Ancak, kamu g\u00f6revlisi, \u00f6zel ili\u015fkileri sebebiyle bu konuda yetkili olan ki\u015filere i\u015fi yapt\u0131rabilece\u011fine veya herhangi bir \u015fekilde i\u015fi yapabilece\u011fine inand\u0131rarak menfaat temin etmektedir. \u015eayet kamu g\u00f6revlisi, g\u00f6r\u00fclmesi istenen i\u015f konusunda kendisi esasen g\u00f6revli ve yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde, g\u00f6revli ve yetkili oldu\u011fundan ve i\u015fi yapaca\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle ki\u015fiyi yan\u0131ltarak menfaat temin etmi\u015f ise, art\u0131k bu su\u00e7un de\u011fil, doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unun olu\u015ftu\u011funu kabul etmek gerekir. Bu madde kapsam\u0131na giren olaylarda ki\u015fi, kamu g\u00f6revlisine sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 menfaatin haks\u0131z bir menfaat oldu\u011funu bilmektedir. Ki\u015fi, yasal olan veya olmayan bir i\u015finin g\u00f6r\u00fclmesi amac\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olarak kamu g\u00f6revlisine bir menfaat temin etmektedir. S\u00f6z konusu su\u00e7, kamu g\u00f6revlisinin, g\u00f6revine girmeyen ve yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir i\u015fi yapaca\u011f\u0131 veya yapt\u0131raca\u011f\u0131 kanaatini uyand\u0131rarak menfaat sa\u011flamas\u0131yla tamamlanm\u0131\u015f olur. Bu durumda, s\u00f6z konusu su\u00e7un olu\u015fumu a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan, menfaati sa\u011flayan ki\u015finin i\u015finin g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcp g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011fini ara\u015ft\u0131rmaya gerek yoktur. S\u00f6z konusu su\u00e7un olu\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in kamu g\u00f6revlisinin g\u00f6revi ba\u015f\u0131nda bulunmas\u0131 da gerekmez. G\u00f6rev mahalli d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda da bu su\u00e7 olu\u015fabilir. Bu su\u00e7 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan \u00f6nemli olan, haks\u0131z menfaati temin eden ki\u015finin bir kamu g\u00f6revlisi olmas\u0131 ve asl\u0131nda g\u00f6revine girmedi\u011fi bilinen bir i\u015fi \u00f6zel ba\u011flant\u0131lar\u0131 sebebiyle yapabilece\u011finden s\u00f6z ederek ki\u015filerden haks\u0131z bir menfaat temin etmesidir. Kamu g\u00f6revlisinin, g\u00f6r\u00fclmesi istenen i\u015f konusunda kendisi esasen g\u00f6revli ve yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde, g\u00f6revli ve yetkili oldu\u011fundan ve i\u015fi yapaca\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle ki\u015fiyi yan\u0131ltarak menfaat temin etmi\u015f olmas\u0131 halinde ise, doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unun olu\u015ftu\u011funu kabul etmek gerekir.’ H\u00fckm\u00fcne amir oldu\u011fu, buradaki temel ayr\u0131m ma\u011fdurlar\u0131n subjektif iradesine dayanmaktad\u0131r, e\u011fer ma\u011fdurlar san\u0131k ya da san\u0131klar\u0131n yapaca\u011f\u0131 i\u015fin g\u00f6revlerine girmedi\u011fini biliyorlarsa 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 255. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir i\u015f i\u00e7in yarar sa\u011flama su\u00e7u olu\u015facak, e\u011fer ma\u011fdurlar yan\u0131lt\u0131larak san\u0131k yada san\u0131klar\u0131n yapaca\u011f\u0131 i\u015fin g\u00f6revlerine girdi\u011fi konusunda ikna edilmi\u015f iseler, doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7u s\u00f6z konusu olacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Somut olaya bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde: T.C.K.nun 6\/1 -c maddesine g\u00f6re: kamu g\u00f6revlisi olan belediye meclis \u00fcyesi N. A.’nun g\u00f6revine girmeyen ve yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan pazar yeri da\u011f\u0131t\u0131m\u0131 i\u015fi yapabilece\u011fini ve yapt\u0131rabilece\u011fini etrafta yayarak belirtili \u015fekilde menfaat temin etti\u011fi, menfaat temin eden m\u00fc\u015fteki ve m\u00fcdahillerin ise pazar yeri da\u011f\u0131t\u0131m i\u015fini san\u0131k N. A.’nun g\u00f6revine girmedi\u011fini ve bu hususta yetkisi bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildikleri, zira m\u00fc\u015fteki ve m\u00fcdahillerin \u00e7o\u011funun pazarc\u0131 esnaf\u0131 oldu\u011fu yada pazarc\u0131l\u0131k i\u015fi ile i\u015ftigal eden ki\u015filerle irtibatlar\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, pazar yeri da\u011f\u0131t\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n belediye meclis \u00fcyesi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 bildikleri, en az\u0131ndan bu hususu bilmelerinin hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun oldu\u011fu, san\u0131k N.’nin i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu kamu g\u00f6revini kullanarak ve \u00f6zel ili\u015fkileri sebebiyle pazar yeri tahsisi i\u015fini ilgili ki\u015filere yapt\u0131rabilece\u011fi izlenimini yaratarak menfaat temin etti\u011fi, san\u0131k S. S.’in ise, kendisi kamu g\u00f6revlisi olmamakla birlikte san\u0131k N.’nin bu eylemine i\u015ftirak etti\u011fi, ancak kamu g\u00f6revlisi taraf\u0131ndan i\u015flenmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olan T.C.K.nun 255. maddesinde belirtilen yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir i\u015f i\u00e7in yarar sa\u011flama su\u00e7unu kamu g\u00f6revlisi olmayan ki\u015filerin i\u015ftirak edebilece\u011fi, san\u0131k S. S.’in de bu su\u00e7a i\u015ftirak etti\u011fi bu eylemden san\u0131k N.’yle birlikte sorumlu oldu\u011fu, bir an i\u00e7in eylemin doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kabul edilse dahi, yerle\u015fik Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131na g\u00f6re, doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unun olu\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in failin hileli davran\u0131\u015flarla bir kimseyi aldat\u0131p onun veya ba\u015fkas\u0131n\u0131n zarar\u0131na olarak kendisine veya ba\u015fkas\u0131na bir yarar sa\u011flamas\u0131n\u0131n gerekli oldu\u011fu, hile ise nitelikli bir yalan olup yalan\u0131n belli oranda a\u011f\u0131r yo\u011fun ve ustaca olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, sergilenmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan ma\u011fdurun denetleme olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131r nitelikte olmas\u0131 ve kullan\u0131lan hileyle ma\u011fdurun yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmesi ve yan\u0131ltma sonucu kand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flarla yalanlara inanan ma\u011fdur taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131k veya bir ba\u015fkas\u0131na haks\u0131z \u00e7\u0131kar sa\u011flanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Hilenin kand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 nitelikte olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, her somut olay\u0131n kendi \u00f6zelli\u011fine g\u00f6re de\u011ferlendirilmeli, olay\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fi, ma\u011fdurun durumu, fiil olan ili\u015fkisi, kullan\u0131lan hilenin \u015fekli, kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise gizlenen veya de\u011fi\u015ftirilen belgenin nitelikleri ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 nazara al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. Sonu\u00e7 olarak hileli davran\u0131\u015f\u0131n aldat\u0131c\u0131 nitelikte olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, basit bir yalan\u0131n hileli hareket olarak kabul edilmeyece\u011fi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ve bu perspektiften somut olaya bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda: m\u00fcdahil ve m\u00fc\u015ftekilerin basit bir ara\u015ft\u0131rmayla ve belediyeye ba\u015fvurmak suretiyle pazar yerlerinin san\u0131klar N. ve S. taraf\u0131ndan da\u011f\u0131t\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6\u011frenebilecekleri, bu haliyle yap\u0131lan hilenin vas\u0131fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bir sebeple somut olayda doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unun unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n da bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu haliyle mahkememizin 26.5.2009 tarih ve 2009\/54 E., 2009\/167 K. say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131nda belirtilen gerek\u00e7elerin ve verilen h\u00fckm\u00fcn toplanan delillere dosya kapsam\u0131na ve olay\u0131n olu\u015funa uygun oldu\u011fu…”,<\/p>\n

    Gerek\u00e7esiyle ilk h\u00fckm\u00fcnde direnmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu h\u00fckm\u00fcn de Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ve san\u0131klar m\u00fcdafileri taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine. Yarg\u0131tay C. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n “bozma” istekli 14.6.2012 g\u00fcn ve 69189 Say\u0131l\u0131 tebli\u011fnamesiyle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya. Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n

    KARAR : \u00d6zel Daireyle yerel mahkeme aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; san\u0131k N.’nin meclis \u00fcyesi oldu\u011fu belediye taraf\u0131ndan yeniden d\u00fczenlenen semt pazar\u0131ndaki tezgah yerlerinden tahsis edilmesini sa\u011flayacaklar\u0131na inand\u0131rd\u0131klar\u0131 ma\u011fdurlardan yarar sa\u011flama \u015feklindeki eylemlerin, yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir i\u015f i\u00e7in yarar sa\u011flama su\u00e7unu mu, yoksa basit doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu mu olu\u015fturdu\u011funun belirlenmesine dair ise de, direnme h\u00fckm\u00fc kurulurken haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6zlerinin sorulmamas\u0131suretiyle savunma haklar\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlan\u0131p s\u0131n\u0131rlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6ncelikle de\u011ferlendirilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan:<\/p>\n

    Yarg\u0131tay 11. Ceza Dairesinin bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra yerel mahkemece san\u0131klar\u0131n da haz\u0131r bulunduklar\u0131 duru\u015fmada, s\u0131ras\u0131yla haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara haklar\u0131n\u0131n hat\u0131rlat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, haz\u0131r bulunan kat\u0131lan A.’e, haz\u0131r bulunmayan baz\u0131 kat\u0131lanlar\u0131n vekillerine ve san\u0131k m\u00fcdafilerine bozmaya kar\u015f\u0131 diyeceklerinin soruldu\u011fu, haz\u0131r bulunan m\u00fc\u015fteki \u0130.’ye s\u00f6z verildi\u011fi, sonra Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131ndan bozma ilam\u0131na ve san\u0131klar\u0131n tutukluluk durumlar\u0131na dair m\u00fctalaa al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6z hakk\u0131 tan\u0131nmadan duru\u015fmaya son verilip direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn kuruldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.U.K.nun 251. maddesine paralel d\u00fczenlemeler i\u00e7eren 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun 216. maddesinin son f\u0131kras\u0131nda: “H\u00fck\u00fcmden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilir h\u00fckm\u00fc yer almaktad\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm gere\u011fince kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu takdirde mutlaka son s\u00f6z san\u0131\u011fa verilerek duru\u015fma bitirilecektir. Ceza Genel Kurulunun 6.7.2004 g\u00fcn ve 2004\/4-138-159; Ceza Genel Kurulunun 25.4.2006 g\u00fcn ve 2006\/2-3-124; Ceza Genel Kurulunun 4.12.2007 g\u00fcn ve 2007\/1-246-261, Ceza Genel Kurulunun 29.1.2008 g\u00fcn ve 2007\/5-193-7, 28.4.2009 g\u00fcn ve 2009\/9-77-111 ile Ceza Genel Kurulunun 29.1.2013 g\u00fcn ve 2012\/7-1406-30 Say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere; savunma hakk\u0131yla yak\u0131ndan ilgili bulunan bu usul kural\u0131 emredici nitelikte olup, uyulmamas\u0131 yasaya mutlak ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturmaktad\u0131r. Ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en \u00f6nemli hakk\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131d\u0131r, haz\u0131r oldu\u011fu oturumda son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmeden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    \u0130lk defa h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulurken “son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi” kural\u0131, bozmadan sonra ba\u015flayan yarg\u0131lamada da kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n kesintisizlik ve s\u00fcreklilik ilkesinin do\u011fal sonucu olarak aynen ge\u00e7erlidir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc dava sonu\u00e7lanmam\u0131\u015f ve yarg\u0131lama devam etmektedir. Kovu\u015fturman\u0131n sona erdirilmesi ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn tesis ve tefhimine ge\u00e7ilmesi \u00f6ncesinde, son konu\u015fan taraf\u0131n haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131k olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi \u015feklinde anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken “en son s\u00f6z”\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi kural\u0131na uyulmamas\u0131 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun 216. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Nitekim \u00f6\u011fretide de: “En son s\u00f6z san\u0131\u011f\u0131nd\u0131r. Son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi, m\u00fcdafaa bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00e7ok \u00f6nemlidir. Bunun i\u00e7indir ki son s\u00f6z\u00fcn haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilmemesi mutlak temyiz sebebi ( hukuka kesin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k ) ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bozma sebebi say\u0131lmaktad\u0131r ( N. Kunter, Feridun Yenisey, A. Nuho\u011flu, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 18. Bas\u0131. Beta. \u0130stanbul, s. 1484 ); “H\u00fck\u00fcm ( karar ) safhas\u0131na ge\u00e7meden \u00f6nce son s\u00f6z haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa verilmek zorundad\u0131r. Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm ( C.M.K.nun 216\/3 ) silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve su\u00e7suzluk karinesi ilkelerinin bir gere\u011fi olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f ve uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu emredici bir h\u00fck\u00fcmd\u00fcr… Son s\u00f6z hakk\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131\u011fa verilmesi, bozmadan sonraki yarg\u0131lamada da uyulmas\u0131 zorunlu bir usul kural\u0131d\u0131r.” ( Y. \u00dcnver, H. Hakeri, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, 7. Bas\u0131, Adalet. Ankara, cilt: 2, s. 146 ve 149 ) \u015feklinde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmek suretiyle, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131\u011fa mutlaka son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmesi gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi ittifakla benimsenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde:<\/p>\n

    Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bozma ilam\u0131na ve san\u0131klar\u0131n tutukluluk durumlar\u0131na dair g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131ndan sonra yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilerek h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bitirilmesinden \u00f6nce haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun 216\/3. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k olu\u015fturdu\u011fundan, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131sonucunu do\u011furan bu usule ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k sebebiyle yerel mahkeme direnme karar\u0131nda isabet bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Bu itibarla, direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi isabetsizli\u011finden di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

    1- ) Kar\u015f\u0131yaka 2. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi’nin 14.9.2010 g\u00fcn ve 232-224 Say\u0131l\u0131 direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, haz\u0131r bulunan san\u0131klara son s\u00f6z\u00fcn verilmemesi isabetsizli\u011finden di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin BOZULMASINA,<\/p>\n

    2- ) Dosyan\u0131n, mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay C. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 03.06.2014 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oybirli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    1. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2016\/1504<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2016\/2218<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 27.4.2016<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>T\u00dcRK M\u0130LLET\u0130 ADINA<\/p>\n

    1-) CMK.nun 188\/1.maddesi uyar\u0131nca duru\u015fmaya gelmeyen san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiinin duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunarak g\u00f6revini yapmaya zorlanmas\u0131, kat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 oturumlardaki bilgi, belge ve i\u015flemlere kar\u015f\u0131 savunma yapmaya davet edilmesi, gerekti\u011finde CMK.nun 150\/3. maddesi uyar\u0131nca yeniden zorunlu bir m\u00fcdafii g\u00f6revlendirilmesi yoluna gidilerek savunmada olu\u015fan bo\u015fluk ve k\u0131s\u0131tl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n giderilmesi gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmeden, san\u0131k … ve su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocuk … m\u00fcdafiilerinin haz\u0131r bulundurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 14.9.2015 tarihli celsede, Dairemizin 22.4.2015 tarihli ve 2608-2557 Say\u0131l\u0131 aleyhe bozma ilam\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 diyeceklerinin saptanmas\u0131 suretiyle savunma haklar\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    2-) Alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131ldan az olmayan hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7tan yarg\u0131lanan ve ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu olarak ayn\u0131 yer cezaevinde bulunan ve duru\u015fmalarda ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmas\u0131 konusunda karar verilmemi\u015f bulunan su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocuk …’nin, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulundurulmadan, m\u00fcdafii huzurunda bozmaya ilam\u0131na ve esas hakk\u0131ndaki m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 diyece\u011fi ile son s\u00f6z\u00fc sorulmadan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 suretiyle savunma hakk\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlanarak CMK’nun 193. ve 196. maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    3-) Anayasa Mahkemesi’nin 8.10.2015 tarih, 2014\/140 esas ve 2015\/85 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 53. maddesinin iptal edilen b\u00f6l\u00fcmleri do\u011frultusunda san\u0131klar … ve …’nin hukuki durumunun yeniden de\u011ferlendirilmesinde zorunluluk bulunmas\u0131,<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : Usule ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup, san\u0131klar …, … ve su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocuk … m\u00fcdafiilerinin temyiz itirazlar\u0131 bu sebeple yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden, di\u011fer y\u00f6nleri incelenmeksizin san\u0131k … ve su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocuk … hakk\u0131nda kurulan h\u00fck\u00fcmlerin bu nedenlerle, san\u0131k … hakk\u0131nda kurulan h\u00fckm\u00fcn ise irtibat sebebiyle tebli\u011fnamedeki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnceye ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak BOZULMASINA, 27.4.2016 tarihinde oybirli\u011fi ile karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
    \n
    \n

    6. CEZA DA\u0130RES\u0130
    \nE. 2021\/12028
    \nK. 2021\/9993
    \nT. 27.5.2021<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    MAL TESL\u0130M\u0130NE MECBUR KILMAK SURET\u0130YLE YA\u011eMA SU\u00c7U<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>( H\u00e2kim veya Mahkemenin Zorunlu G\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Durumlarda Ayn\u0131 Anda G\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc ve Sesli \u0130leti\u015fim Sistemi Kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 Tekni\u011finin Kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 Suretiyle Yurt \u0130\u00e7inde Bulunan San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Sorgusunun Yap\u0131labilece\u011fi – Duru\u015fmalara Kat\u0131lmas\u0131na Karar Verilebilece\u011fi )<\/p>\n

    COV\u0130D 19 SALGINI GEREK\u00c7ES\u0130YLE SANI\u011eIN SEGB\u0130S Y\u00d6NTEM\u0130YLE SAVUNMASININ ALINMASI<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0( Somut Olayda 20 Y\u0131ldan Fazla Bir Hapis Cezas\u0131 Alma Riski Alt\u0131nda Bulunan ve Sonu\u00e7ta Toplam Olarak 16 Y\u0131l 7 Ay Hapis Cezas\u0131 Alan San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Israrla Duru\u015fmaya Bizzat Kat\u0131lmak \u0130stedi\u011fi – Kat\u0131lan Ma\u011fdur ve San\u0131k M\u00fcdafii Duru\u015fmalara Bizzat Kat\u0131l\u0131p Huzurda \u0130fade ve Beyanlar\u0131 Al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131\/San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Mahkeme Huzurunda Savunmas\u0131n\u0131n Al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve Duru\u015fmalara Kat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n Sa\u011flanabilmesi \u0130\u00e7in Duru\u015fman\u0131n Ertelenmesi Gerekti\u011fi )<\/p>\n

    SEGB\u0130S \u0130LE SAVUNMA YAPMAYA ZORLAMAK<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0( Mahkemece Bu Suretle Yarg\u0131lamaya Devam Edilmesi ve Mahk\u00fbmiyet Karar\u0131 Verilmesinin 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’n\u0131n 289\/1-h Maddesi Uyar\u0131nca H\u00fck\u00fcm \u0130\u00e7in \u00d6nemli Olan Hususlarda Mahkeme Karar\u0131 ile Savunma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n S\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 Oldu\u011fu – Temyiz Ba\u015fvurusunda \u0130leri S\u00fcr\u00fclmese Bile Re’sen Dikkate Al\u0131nmas\u0131 Gereken Bu Hukuka Kesin Ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k H\u00e2linin Ayn\u0131 Zamanda Anayasa’n\u0131n 36\/1 ve A\u0130HS M. 6\/1. Maddeleri Uyar\u0131nca Adil Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n da \u0130hl\u00e2li Oldu\u011fu )<\/p>\n

    SANI\u011eIN DURU\u015eMALARA KATILMAK \u0130STEMES\u0130<\/strong>\u00a0<\/span>( Israrla Duru\u015fmalara Kat\u0131lmak \u0130steyen San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Bizzat Mahkeme Huzurunda Ve M\u00fcdafii Yard\u0131m\u0131ndan \u0130stifade ile Savunmas\u0131n\u0131n Al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve Duru\u015fmalara Kat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n Sa\u011flanabilmesi \u0130\u00e7in Ertelenmesi Gerekti\u011fi \u2013 Bunun Yerine SEGB\u0130S ile Savunma Yapmaya Zorlanmak Suretiyle Yarg\u0131lamaya Devam Edilmesi ve Mahk\u00fbmiyet Karar\u0131 Verilmesinin Hatal\u0131 Oldu\u011fu )<\/p>\n

    2709\/m. 36<\/p>\n

    5271\/m. 288, 289<\/p>\n

    A\u0130HS\/m. 6<\/p>\n

    \u00d6ZET :<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>Dava, ba\u015fkas\u0131n\u0131 bir mal\u0131 teslimi veya mal\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 koymamaya mecbur k\u0131lmak suretiyle ya\u011fma su\u00e7una ili\u015fkindir. H\u00e2kim veya mahkemenin zorunlu g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc durumlarda, ayn\u0131 anda g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc ve sesli ileti\u015fim sistemi kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 tekni\u011finin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle yurt i\u00e7inde bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131labilir veya duru\u015fmalara kat\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilebilir.<\/p>\n

    Olayda, Covit 19 salg\u0131n\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n SEGB\u0130S y\u00f6ntemiyle savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015f ise de; somut olayda 20 y\u0131ldan fazla bir hapis cezas\u0131 alma riski alt\u0131nda bulunan ve sonu\u00e7ta toplam olarak 16 y\u0131l 7 ay hapis cezas\u0131 alan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u0131srarla duru\u015fmaya bizzat kat\u0131lmak istedi\u011fi, kat\u0131lan, ma\u011fdur ve san\u0131k m\u00fcdafii duru\u015fmalara bizzat kat\u0131l\u0131p huzurda ifade ve beyanlar\u0131 al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2lde, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkeme huzurunda savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve duru\u015fmalara kat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanabilmesi i\u00e7in duru\u015fman\u0131n ertelenmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n

    Mahkemece, SEGB\u0130S ile savunma yapmaya zorlanmak suretiyle yarg\u0131lamaya devam edilmesi ve mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 verilmesi 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMK’n\u0131n 289\/1-h maddesi uyar\u0131nca, h\u00fck\u00fcm i\u00e7in \u00f6nemli olan hususlarda mahkeme karar\u0131 ile savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131d\u0131r ve temyiz ba\u015fvurusunda ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmese bile re’sen dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gereken bu hukuka kesin ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k h\u00e2li, ayn\u0131 zamanda Anayasa’n\u0131n 36\/1 ve A\u0130HS m. 6\/1. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n da ihl\u00e2lidir.<\/p>\n

    A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle, \u0131srarla duru\u015fmalara kat\u0131lmak isteyen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bizzat mahkeme huzurunda ve m\u00fcdafii yard\u0131m\u0131ndan istifade ile savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve duru\u015fmalara kat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanabilmesi i\u00e7in ertelenmesi yerine, SEGB\u0130S ile savunma yapmaya zorlanmak suretiyle yarg\u0131lamaya devam edilmesi ve mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 verilmesi hatal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2013\/481<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2015\/519<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 15.12.2015<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>Kasten yaralama su\u00e7undan san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n \u015fik\u00e2yetten vazge\u00e7me sebebiyle d\u00fc\u015fmesine ili\u015fkin, … Sulh Ceza Mahkemesince verilen … g\u00fcn ve … say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine, dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay … Ceza Dairesince … g\u00fcn ve … say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “San\u0131\u011f\u0131n ma\u011fdura y\u00f6nelik TCK’nin 6\/1-f maddesine g\u00f6re silahtan say\u0131lan ta\u015fla yaralama eyleminin \u015fik\u00e2yete ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n vazge\u00e7meyle d\u00fc\u015fmeyece\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden hatal\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme ile d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilmesi” isabetsizli\u011finden bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise … g\u00fcn ve … say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz istemi, su\u00e7un s\u00fcbutuna, niteli\u011fine ya da i\u015flenme \u015fekline dair olmay\u0131p, sadece san\u0131k lehine getirilmi\u015f bir hukuk kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmak suretiyle verilen d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131na y\u00f6neliktir. Mahkemece bu hukuk kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lsa bile sonu\u00e7ta san\u0131k lehine bir karar verilmi\u015f ve verilen bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan bir itiraz yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu a\u015famada san\u0131ktan vazge\u00e7meye kar\u015f\u0131 diyeceklerinin sorulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fine dair bir bozman\u0131n hi\u00e7bir fayda sa\u011flamayaca\u011f\u0131 da ortadad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Ayr\u0131ca Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizi d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilmemesi gerekti\u011fine dair de\u011fil, san\u0131ktan sorulmadan ve r\u0131zas\u0131 al\u0131nmadan verilmesine ili\u015fkindir. Her ne kadar temyiz istemi d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik olsa bile, san\u0131k aleyhine bir temyiz olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bozmadan sonra da san\u0131k aleyhine sonu\u00e7 do\u011furacak bir karar verilmesi de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn g\u00f6r\u00fclmemektedir.<\/p>\n

    \u00d6zel Dairenin Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k lehine getirilen hukuk kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 uygulamadan dolay\u0131 san\u0131k aleyhine olacak \u015fekilde h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozdurulmas\u0131n\u0131 isteyemeyece\u011fini g\u00f6zetmeden, temyiz isteminin reddine karar vermesi yerine san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ma\u011fdura y\u00f6nelik fiilini silahtan say\u0131lan ta\u015fla i\u015flemesi sebebiyle su\u00e7un takibinin \u015fik\u00e2yete ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n vazge\u00e7me sebebiyle d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmesine karar verilemeyece\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmesi isabetli de\u011fildir” d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle itiraz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurarak, \u00d6zel Dairenin bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve temyiz isteminin reddine karar verilmesi talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

    CMK’nun 308. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapan \u00d6zel Daire taraf\u0131ndan 02.05.2013 g\u00fcn ve 12834-17831 say\u0131 ile itiraz nedenlerinin yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bahisle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    KARAR : \u00d6zel Daire ile Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; \u015fik\u00e2yetten vazge\u00e7me sebebiyle d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilen davada, 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 73\/6. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f bulunan “kanunda aksi yaz\u0131l\u0131 olmad\u0131k\u00e7a, vazge\u00e7me onu kabul etmeyen san\u0131\u011f\u0131 etkilemez” \u015feklindeki kural\u0131n, 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 309. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda sadece san\u0131k lehine konulmu\u015f bir kural olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u015fik\u00e2yetten vazge\u00e7meyi kabul edip etmedi\u011finin san\u0131ktan sorulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde, bu ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131ktan bahisle Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fc san\u0131k aleyhine temyiz edip edemeyece\u011finin belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k ile ma\u011fdurenin ayn\u0131 k\u00f6yde ya\u015fad\u0131klar\u0131, aralar\u0131nda \u00f6nceye dayal\u0131 anla\u015fmazl\u0131klar bulundu\u011fu, ma\u011fdurenin san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ta\u015f atarak kendisini yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcr\u00fcp \u015fik\u00e2yet\u00e7i oldu\u011fu, bunun \u00fczerine ba\u015flat\u0131lan soru\u015fturma neticesinde, san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda kasten yaralama su\u00e7undan TCK’nun 86\/2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 istemiyle kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

    … tarihli, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n haz\u0131r bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada ma\u011fdurenin san\u0131k hakk\u0131ndaki \u015fik\u00e2yetinden vazge\u00e7ti\u011fi, ayn\u0131 celsede \u015fik\u00e2yetten vazge\u00e7me sebebiyle kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fc\u015fmesine kararverildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

    Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131nca karar\u0131n; san\u0131\u011fa hakk\u0131ndaki \u015fik\u00e2yetten vazge\u00e7meyi kabul edip etmedi\u011finin sorulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden yoklu\u011funda d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilmesinin kanuna ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fundan bahisle temyiz edildi\u011fi,<\/p>\n

    Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi san\u0131\u011f\u0131n herhangi bir temyiz talebinde bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n

    Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusunda isabetli bir hukuki \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcme ula\u015f\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in, konuya dair kanuni d\u00fczenlemelerin incelenmesinde yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun, 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 8\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olan 309. maddesi; “Maznunun lehine olan hukuki kaidelere muhalefet, maznunun aleyhine h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozdurulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Cumhuriyet M\u00fcddei umum\u00eeli\u011fine bir hak vermez”, 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanununun 290. maddesinde de; “San\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarar\u0131na olan hukuk kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k san\u0131k aleyhine h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozdurulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131na bir hak vermez” \u015feklinde h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. CMK’nun 290. maddesinin gerek\u00e7esinde ise; “Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ger\u00e7e\u011fin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 amac\u0131na y\u00f6nelik veya kamu yarar\u0131na dair olmayan, yaln\u0131zca san\u0131k yarar\u0131na kabul edilmi\u015f hukuk kural\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmamas\u0131, eksik veya yanl\u0131\u015f uygulanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 sebebiyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k aleyhine bozulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in temyiz yoluna ba\u015fvuramaz” denilmi\u015ftir. Bu d\u00fczenlemeler uyar\u0131nca Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, amac\u0131 yaln\u0131zca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hak ve menfaatlerini korumak olan bir hukuk kural\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilmi\u015f bulunmas\u0131 durumunda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n lehine olan bu ihlali ileri s\u00fcrerek, temyiz kanun yoluna m\u00fcracaat edip h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k aleyhine bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 isteyemeyecektir.<\/p>\n

    Her iki h\u00fck\u00fcm de san\u0131klar\u0131n haklar\u0131n\u0131 korumak ve lehlerine do\u011fmu\u015f olan bir durumun, aleyhlerine olacak \u015fekilde ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemek amac\u0131yla kabul edilmi\u015f olup, maddedeki “san\u0131k yarar\u0131na” s\u00f6zc\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn; “sadece san\u0131k yarar\u0131na konulmu\u015f olan” \u00f6rne\u011fin; san\u0131\u011fa ek savunma hakk\u0131 verilmemesi, \u00f6nceden kendisine tebli\u011f olunan iddianamenin sorgudan \u00f6nce okunmamas\u0131 gibi “hukuki kaideler” ibaresinin “usul h\u00fck\u00fcmleri” olarak anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi \u00f6\u011freti ve uygulamada kabul edilmektedir. Sadece san\u0131k yarar\u0131na de\u011fil, ayn\u0131 zamanda kamu d\u00fczenine veya yarg\u0131laman\u0131n i\u015fleyi\u015fine dair usul kurallar\u0131n\u0131n ihlali halinde bu h\u00fck\u00fcm uygulanmayacakt\u0131r. Yaln\u0131z san\u0131k yarar\u0131na kabul edilmi\u015f usul kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k halinde san\u0131k aleyhine bir netice meydana gelmi\u015fse Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fc san\u0131k lehine temyiz etmesinin \u00f6n\u00fcnde ise herhangi bir hukuki engel bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    \u00d6\u011fretide; “Ceza muhakemesi normlar\u0131 iki \u00e7e\u015fittir. \u00c7o\u011funlu\u011fu olu\u015fturan normlar\u0131n amac\u0131 hakikatin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131d\u0131r. Az\u0131nl\u0131kta olanlar, \u015f\u00fcpheden yararlanmas\u0131 gereken san\u0131\u011f\u0131n lehine kabul edilmi\u015flerdir. Hakikatin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ve dolay\u0131s\u0131 ile san\u0131k d\u00e2hil herkesin yani toplumun lehine kabul edilmi\u015f norma ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k elbet bozma nedeni olacakt\u0131r. Fakat sadece san\u0131k yararlans\u0131n diye konulmu\u015f norma ayk\u0131r\u0131 hareket edildi diye san\u0131k aleyhine bozman\u0131n amaca ters d\u00fc\u015fece\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Bu konuda b\u00fct\u00fcn g\u00fc\u00e7l\u00fck, normun hakikatin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in mi, yoksa yaln\u0131zca san\u0131k lehine mi konulmu\u015f oldu\u011funun tayininde ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r. Su\u00e7un mahiyeti de\u011fi\u015fince san\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fcdafaas\u0131n\u0131 yapabilecek halde bulundurulmas\u0131, san\u0131k lehine temyizde cezan\u0131n a\u011f\u0131rla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmamas\u0131 normlar\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k lehine konulduklar\u0131 \u015f\u00fcphe g\u00f6t\u00fcrmez. Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k k\u0131smen de olsa hakikatin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in kabul edilmi\u015f normlar sadece san\u0131k lehine kabul edilmi\u015f say\u0131lmaz.” (Nurullah Kunter-Feridun Yenisey-Ay\u015fe Nuho\u011flu, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, Onalt\u0131nc\u0131 Bas\u0131, Beta Yay\u0131nevi, \u0130stanbul 2007, s. 1427) “Madde, s\u0131rf maznun lehine bir h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis etmi\u015ftir. Yaln\u0131z maznunun menfaati de\u011fil, umumi menfaat d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi ile konulmu\u015f olan h\u00fck\u00fcmler buraya d\u00e2hil de\u011fildir.” (Muhtar \u00c7a\u011flayan, Ceza Muhakemesi Usul\u00fc, 1980, s. 105) “San\u0131k lehine olan kaidelere ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, son karar\u0131n san\u0131k aleyhine bozulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in hak vermez. \u00d6rne\u011fin; san\u0131k beraat etmi\u015fse karar san\u0131\u011fa son s\u00f6z verilmedi diye bozulamaz. Son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmesinin sebebi, kendi lehine bulup \u00e7\u0131karaca\u011f\u0131 bir delil ile lehinde karar verebilmektir. Burada en lehe karar verildi\u011fine g\u00f6re, son s\u00f6z verilmemi\u015f olmas\u0131 daha lehe bir durum do\u011furacak de\u011fildir.” (\u00d6ztekin Tosun, Su\u00e7 Muhakemesi Hukuku Dersleri, Muhakemenin Y\u00fcr\u00fcy\u00fc\u015f\u00fc, \u0130stanbul 1973, Sulhi Garan Matbaas\u0131 s. 209) “Hukuk kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 verilen karar\u0131n temyiz denetiminde bozulacak olmas\u0131 do\u011fald\u0131r. Bu, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131klar\u0131n giderilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurulacak zorunlu bir yoldur. Ancak bazen mahkeme kararlar\u0131ndaki hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmez. Ger\u00e7ekten san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarar\u0131na olan hukuk kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k, aleyhine h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozdurulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131na bir hak vermez. B\u00f6yle bir kural\u0131n getirilmesinin amac\u0131 san\u0131k menfaatine uygun olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan bir durum veya neticenin ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 engellemektir.” (\u00d6zbek-Kanbur- Do\u011fan-Bacaks\u0131z, Tepe, Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku, \u0130kinci Bas\u0131, Se\u00e7kin Yay\u0131nevi, 2011, s. 750) “Amac\u0131 san\u0131\u011f\u0131n menfaatlerinin korunmas\u0131 olan hukuk kural\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 halinde Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n lehine olan bu ihlali \u00f6ne s\u00fcrerek karar\u0131n temyiz incelemesi sonunda bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 isteyemeyecektir. Bu kural\u0131n getirilmi\u015f olmas\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131, san\u0131k menfaatine uygun olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f olan halin veya neticenin ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 engellemektir.” (Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu \u0130zmir \u015eerhi, Veli \u00d6zer \u00d6zbek, Birinci Bas\u0131, Se\u00e7kin Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara 2005, s. 1128) “San\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarar\u0131na konulan kurallara ayk\u0131r\u0131 davran\u0131lmas\u0131, ilke olarak h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir ise de, bu ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k aleyhine bozulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131na hak vermemektedir.” (Osman Ya\u015far, Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu, Be\u015finci Bas\u0131, Se\u00e7kin Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara 2011, c. 3, s. 3987) \u015feklinde g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015fler bulunmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusu bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

    Kasten yaralama su\u00e7undan san\u0131k hakk\u0131ndaki kamu davas\u0131n\u0131n ma\u011fdurenin \u015fik\u00e2yetinden vazge\u00e7mesi sebebiyle d\u00fc\u015fmesine dair gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi, s\u00f6z konusu karara kar\u015f\u0131 herhangi bir kanun yoluna m\u00fcracaat etmeyen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u015fikayetten vazge\u00e7meyi z\u0131mni olarak kabul etmi\u015f oldu\u011fu, san\u0131k lehine konulan TCK’nun 73\/6. maddesindeki “kanunda aksi yaz\u0131l\u0131 olmad\u0131k\u00e7a, vazge\u00e7me onu kabul etmeyen san\u0131\u011f\u0131 etkilemez” usul kural\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 8\/1. maddesi delaletiyle halen y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan 308. maddesi uyar\u0131nca Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131na san\u0131k aleyhine h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozdurulmas\u0131 i\u00e7in bir hak ve yetki tan\u0131nmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    Nitekim Ceza Genel Kurulunun … g\u00fcn ve … say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda da ayn\u0131 sonuca ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Bu itibarla, itiraz\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizi isteminin reddine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    \u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan … ve …;”San\u0131k …, TCK’n\u0131n 6\/1-f f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re silah say\u0131lan ta\u015f ile ma\u011fdureye vurup onu yaralam\u0131\u015f ve bu husus iddianamede zikredildikten sonra san\u0131khakk\u0131nda TCK’nun 86\/2. maddesi gere\u011fince kamu davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. H\u00e2kim h\u00fck\u00fcm kurarken olayda kullan\u0131lan ta\u015f\u0131 silah olarak kabul etmeyip, s\u00f6z konusu su\u00e7un \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 oldu\u011funu kabul ederek, ma\u011fdurenin de \u015fikayetinden vazge\u00e7ti\u011finden bahisle d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    6217 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 26. maddesiyle 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanuna eklenen ge\u00e7ici maddeye g\u00f6re ‘Hapis cezas\u0131ndan \u00e7evrilenler hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere sonu\u00e7 olarak belirlenen 3000 TL dahil adli para cezas\u0131ndan verilen mahkumiyet h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine kar\u015f\u0131 temyiz yoluna ba\u015fvurulamaz.’<\/p>\n

    Mahkemenin verdi\u011fi karar direk 3000 TL adli para cezas\u0131ndan ibaret bir h\u00fck\u00fcm olsa idi Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esi su\u00e7un vasf\u0131na veya su\u00e7un niteli\u011fine dair bir konu i\u00e7ermiyorsa bu takdirde Y\u00fcksek Yarg\u0131tay’ca hi\u00e7 incelenmeden, temyiz dilek\u00e7esi s\u00fcresinde mi de\u011fil mi bu hususlara hi\u00e7 bak\u0131lmadan ret karar\u0131 verilebilirdi.<\/p>\n

    Ancak \u00f6n\u00fcm\u00fczde bulunan h\u00fck\u00fcm 3000 TL adli para cezas\u0131ndan ibaret bir h\u00fck\u00fcm de\u011fildir. San\u0131k hakk\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir. D\u00fc\u015fme ve beraat kararlar\u0131 gibi kararlar\u0131n Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi halinde bu d\u00fc\u015fme ve beraat kararlar\u0131 3000 TL adli para cezas\u0131nda uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi hi\u00e7 incelenmeden ret edilemez.<\/p>\n

    Beraat ve d\u00fc\u015fme kararlar\u0131nda temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin su\u00e7 vasf\u0131na veya su\u00e7un niteli\u011fine y\u00f6nelik olmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131 da aranmamaktad\u0131r. Temyizin i\u00e7eri\u011fi ne olursa olsun beraat ve d\u00fc\u015fme kararlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 verilen temyiz dilek\u00e7eleri Yarg\u0131tay’ca incelendikten sonra karara ba\u011flanacakt\u0131r. Beraat ve d\u00fc\u015fme kararlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 verilen temyiz dilek\u00e7esi sadece s\u00fcre y\u00f6n\u00fcnden veya temyiz edenin temyiz etmeye her hangi bir s\u0131fat\u0131 yoksa bu sebeple ret edilebilir. Bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda temyiz kapsam\u0131 ne olursa olsun beraat ve d\u00fc\u015fme kararlar\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay’ca incelendikten sonra karara ba\u011flanacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Beraat ve d\u00fc\u015fme kararlar\u0131nda Yarg\u0131tay’ca \u00f6nce dosya incelenmeli, savc\u0131n\u0131n temyizi s\u00fcresinde mi de\u011fil mi, daha sonra karar usul ve esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmeli bir eksiklik bulundu\u011fu takdirde, temyiz talebi kabul edilerek karar bozulmal\u0131 veya usul ve esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden bir eksiklik yoksa Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizi yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyerek h\u00fck\u00fcm onanmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131, mahkemenin d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 temyiz yoluna ba\u015f vurmu\u015ftur. Bu karar beraat karar\u0131 olsa idi beraat kararlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 Cumhuriyet savc\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n temyiz yoluna ba\u015f vurmalar\u0131 halinde bu temyiz mutlaka san\u0131k aleyhinedir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc beraat d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda t\u00fcm uygulamalar san\u0131k aleyhinedir. D\u00fc\u015fme kararlar\u0131nda ise Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beraatini istemi\u015fsesan\u0131k lehine bir temyizdir. Ancak d\u00fc\u015fme kararlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 beraat d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka bir uygulama isteniyorsa bunlar da san\u0131k aleyhinedir.<\/p>\n

    Yarg\u0131tay, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizinin 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 309. maddesinin kapsam\u0131na girip girmedi\u011fine karar verilebilmesi i\u00e7in Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n o dosyay\u0131 incelemeye al\u0131p CMUK’nun 309. maddenin \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n bu olayda bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirledikten sonra bir karar vermelidir. Hi\u00e7bir inceleme yapmadan 3000 TL para cezas\u0131 imi\u015f gibi ret karar\u0131 veremez.<\/p>\n

    Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz talebi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda Yarg\u0131tay inceleme yap\u0131p CMUK’nun 309. maddesi gere\u011fince Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizini ret edebilmesi i\u00e7in mahkemenin verdi\u011fi d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131n\u0131n net do\u011fru bir karar olmas\u0131 ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n su\u00e7unun da \u015fik\u00e2yete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 olmas\u0131 ayr\u0131ca d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131n\u0131n onanmas\u0131n\u0131 engelleyen hukuk kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n da san\u0131k aleyhine de\u011fil san\u0131k yarar\u0131na olmas\u0131 halinde Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizi ret edilir. Yarg\u0131tay, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde sarf etti\u011fi s\u00f6z ve c\u00fcmlelerle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 de\u011fildir. \u0130ncelenen dosya her y\u00f6nden incelendikten sonra neyi gerektiriyorsa o karar\u0131n verilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

    Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esi \u00fczerine dosya her y\u00f6nden incelendikten sonra s\u00f6z konusu su\u00e7 \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 olup sonu\u00e7 olarak d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilmesi gerekiyorsa ve Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi husus hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir konu olmakla birlikte son s\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmemesi gibi san\u0131k yarar\u0131na bir konu ise bu takdirde fuzuli i\u015flemlerin \u00f6nlenmesi i\u00e7in Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizi ret edilmektedir.<\/p>\n

    Oysa dosyay\u0131 inceledi\u011fimizde san\u0131k silah say\u0131lan ta\u015f ile ma\u011fdureyi yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemi \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 de\u011fildir. Verilen d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 do\u011fru bir karar de\u011fildir. O halde Yarg\u0131tay, incelemesini yaparken Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde belirtti\u011fi ma\u011fdurenin vazge\u00e7mesinden ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n vazge\u00e7meyi kabul edip etmedi\u011finden bahsedilmi\u015fse de olay\u0131m\u0131zda \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 mevcut bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bu hususlar dikkate al\u0131namaz, Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n uygulamas\u0131na gerek\u00e7e olamaz. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc olay\u0131m\u0131zda \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 su\u00e7 s\u00f6z konusu de\u011fildir. Yarg\u0131tay temyiz dilek\u00e7elerine ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6re san\u0131\u011f\u0131n su\u00e7u hangi cezay\u0131 gerektiriyorsa o cezan\u0131n do\u011fru uygulamas\u0131 neyi gerektiriyorsa o karar\u0131 vermesi gerekir.<\/p>\n

    \u015eimdi, bizim olayda Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizinin san\u0131k lehine mi yoksa san\u0131k aleyhine mi oldu\u011fu hususunu net a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131\u011fa kavu\u015fturmam\u0131z gerekmektedir. Kendimizi Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n yerine koyarak olaya bakmam\u0131z gerekmektedir. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 su\u00e7u \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 olarak kabul etti\u011fine g\u00f6re san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda verilen d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131n\u0131 do\u011fru ve yerinde bir karar olarak g\u00f6rm\u00fc\u015f. Fakat, san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilemeyece\u011fini iddia etmektedir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc TCK’nun 73\/6. maddesi gere\u011fince ma\u011fdurun \u015fikayetten vazge\u00e7mesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, bu husus san\u0131\u011fa anlat\u0131l\u0131p bu vazge\u00e7meyi kabul edip etmedi\u011fi sorulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Bu kurala uyulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilemeyece\u011fini iddia etmektedir. O halde Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bu temyizi san\u0131k lehine de\u011fil, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhinedir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 san\u0131k lehine olan bir karard\u0131r. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 san\u0131k lehine olan bu d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 daha lehe olan beraati istememektedir. D\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131k\u0131p itiraz etmektedir. O halde Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n bu temyizi san\u0131k aleyhinedir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhine olan bu temyiz talebi \u00fczerine Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n yapaca\u011f\u0131 tek \u015fey bozmada su\u00e7 ve cezay\u0131 bulup do\u011fru uygulamay\u0131 g\u00f6stererek, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n su\u00e7u ta\u015fla i\u015fledi\u011finden \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 su\u00e7lardan olmay\u0131p san\u0131\u011f\u0131n TCK’nun 86\/2 ve 86\/3-e f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Bu sebeple \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 su\u00e7 oldu\u011fundan bahisle verilen d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r ve bozma sebebidir \u015feklinde h\u00fckm\u00fc esastan bozmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

    Yerel mahkeme Dairemizin bozma karar\u0131na uyup TCK’nun 86\/2 ve 86\/3-e f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fince san\u0131\u011fa hapis veya adli para cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermelidir. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc temyiz san\u0131k aleyhinedir.<\/p>\n

    E\u011fer savc\u0131n\u0131n temyizi san\u0131k lehine beraat karar\u0131 verilmesi talep edilmi\u015f olsa bile durum de\u011fi\u015fmez. Yarg\u0131tay bu sefer san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda TCK’nun 86\/2 ve 86\/3-e maddeleri gere\u011fince h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekirken d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilmesi yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup CMUK’nun 326\/son maddesi gere\u011fince kazan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f hak sakl\u0131 kalmak kayd\u0131 ile h\u00fckm\u00fcn yine bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n

    B\u00f6yle hallerde CMUK’nun 309. maddesine dayanarak Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizini ret edemeyiz. \u00c7\u00fcnk\u00fc mahkemenin verdi\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcm ile Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi do\u011fru uygulama birbirine uymamaktad\u0131r. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyizi leh veya aleyhe olsun Yarg\u0131tay her iki halde h\u00fckm\u00fc bozar. Do\u011fru uygulamay\u0131 g\u00f6sterir. \u015eikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan bir su\u00e7u Yarg\u0131tay \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 imi\u015f gibi ger\u00e7ek d\u0131\u015f\u0131 kabul ederek, \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 olmayan bir su\u00e7u \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 su\u00e7mu\u015f gibi sonuca varmas\u0131 hukuk kurallar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131d\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay’\u0131n team\u00fcllerine uymamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k, ma\u011fdureyi ta\u015f ile de\u011fil de eli ile hafif \u015fekilde yaralam\u0131\u015f olsa idi bu takdirde hakk\u0131nda verilen d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 do\u011fru bir karar olurdu. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 da temyiz dilek\u00e7esinde sons\u00f6z\u00fcn san\u0131\u011fa verilmemesini gerek\u00e7e yap\u0131p temyiz etmi\u015f olsa idi, verilen karar do\u011fru bir karar son s\u00f6z sorulsa bile kararda bir yanl\u0131\u015fl\u0131k yok tekrar d\u00fc\u015fme karar\u0131 verilecekse bu takdirdesan\u0131k yarar\u0131na olan bu hukuk kural\u0131n\u0131n uygulanmamas\u0131 Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131na hak vermeyece\u011finden CMUK’nun 309. maddesinin arad\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015fartlar olu\u015ftu\u011fundan savc\u0131n\u0131n temyizi ret edilebilirdi.<\/p>\n

    Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz dilek\u00e7esinde olay\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n konusunu ele al\u0131rken ger\u00e7ek olay olan ta\u015fla ma\u011fduru yaralama olay\u0131n\u0131 hi\u00e7 ele almam\u0131\u015f mahkemenin yanl\u0131\u015f uygulamas\u0131 olan \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7mu\u015f gibi konuyu ele al\u0131p tart\u0131\u015f\u0131p bir sonuca varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Oysa elimizde \u015fikayete ba\u011fl\u0131 bir su\u00e7 bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Dosyam\u0131zla alakas\u0131 olmayan hayali bir su\u00e7u ele al\u0131p tart\u0131\u015f\u0131p bir kanaate varmam\u0131z do\u011fru uygulamay\u0131 bulmak de\u011fildir. Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n tek amac\u0131 ger\u00e7ek i\u015flenen su\u00e7u ele al\u0131p tahlil ederek do\u011fru uygulamas\u0131n\u0131 bulmakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda \u00d6zel Dairenin uygulamas\u0131 do\u011fru oldu\u011fundan Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n itiraz\u0131n\u0131n reddi gerekti\u011fi” d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle kar\u015f\u0131 oy kullanm\u0131\u015flard\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 : A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

    1-) Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n

    2-) Yarg\u0131tay … Ceza Dairesinin … g\u00fcn ve … say\u0131l\u0131 bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n KALDIRILMASINA,<\/p>\n

    3-) Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n temyiz talebinin, 5320 Say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 8\/1. maddesi gere\u011fince y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olan 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 CMUK’nun 309. maddesi uyar\u0131nca san\u0131k yarar\u0131na getirilen hukuk kural\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131ktan dolay\u0131 Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n san\u0131k aleyhine h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozdurulmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131 bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, ayn\u0131 Kanunun 317. maddesi gere\u011fince REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n

    4-) Dosyan\u0131n mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 15.12.2015 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    T.C.<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    YARGITAY<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURULU<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    E. 2012\/6-1442<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    K. 2013\/451<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    T. 12.11.2013<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

    DAVA : <\/b>Ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 5237 Say\u0131l\u0131 T.C.K.nun 149\/1-a, 35\/2, 150\/2, 53, 54 ve 63. maddeleri uyar\u0131nca 1 y\u0131l 3 ay hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, hak yoksunlu\u011funa, m\u00fcsadereye ve mahsuba ili\u015fkin, Ankara 4. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince verilen 19.4.2007 g\u00fcn ve 95-145 Say\u0131l\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn san\u0131k m\u00fcdafii taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine dosyay\u0131 inceleyen Yarg\u0131tay 6. Ceza Dairesince 15.2.2012 g\u00fcn ve 17458-2248 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “16.2.2007 tarihli oturumda ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu bulundu\u011fu Yozgat Cezaevinden getirilerek savunmas\u0131n\u0131n saptand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu san\u0131k son oturumda haz\u0131r bulundurulmadan yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131l\u0131p h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne karar verilmek suretiyle C.M.K.196. maddesine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131” sebebiyle BOZULMASINA karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ise 3.4.2012 g\u00fcn ve 131262 say\u0131 ile;<\/p>\n

    “C.M.K.nun 196. maddesinin 5. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k h\u00fckm\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda; ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan, yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir cezaevinde tutuklu olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 son oturumda haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131 zorunlu de\u011fildir. Bu sebeple mahkemenin san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yoklu\u011funda kovu\u015fturmay\u0131 bitirmesi ve mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc kurmas\u0131nda isabetsizlik bulunmamaktad\u0131r” d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesiyle itiraz kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurarak, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ve dosyan\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn esastan incelenmesi amac\u0131yla \u00d6zel Daireye g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmesi isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n

    C.M.K.nun 308\/1. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapan \u00d6zel Dairece 12.10.2012 g\u00fcn ve 16889-18242 say\u0131yla itiraz nedenlerinin yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011finden bahisle Yarg\u0131tay Birinci Ba\u015fkanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6nderilen dosya, Ceza Genel Kurulunca de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f ve a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle karara ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    T\u00dcRK M\u0130LLET\u0130 ADINA<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    CEZA GENEL KURUL KARARI<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

    San\u0131\u011f\u0131n ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilen somut olayda, \u00d6zel Daireyle Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fan ve Ceza Genel Kurulunca \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda h\u00fckmen tutuklu bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edildi\u011fi son oturuma getirilmeden karar verilmesinin savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n

    \u0130ncelenen dosya kapsam\u0131ndan;<\/p>\n

    Ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten yarg\u0131lanmakta olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun istinabe suretiyle yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7lamay\u0131 kabul etmedi\u011fini ve duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmak istedi\u011fini beyan etti\u011fi, yerel mahkemece yarg\u0131lamaya konu ya\u011fma su\u00e7unun yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131n be\u015f y\u0131ldan fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmesi ve istinabe yasa\u011f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 sebebiyle yeniden sorgusunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ancak kendisine ve a\u00e7\u0131k adresine ula\u015f\u0131lamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu sebeple hakk\u0131nda yakalama karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi, ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7tan mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tutuklu bulundu\u011fu tespit edilen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n cezaevinden getirtilip zorunlu m\u00fcdafii huzurunda savunmas\u0131 al\u0131nd\u0131ktan sonra hakk\u0131ndaki yakalama karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edilece\u011fi oturumda haz\u0131r bulunmak istedi\u011fine dair bir beyanda bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, m\u00fcdafiinin haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu bir sonraki celsede ayn\u0131 su\u00e7tan mahkumiyetine karar verildi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131k haz\u0131r bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n duru\u015fma yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131 kural\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nun “san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmamas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 193. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131; “Kanunun ayr\u0131k tuttu\u011fu haller sakl\u0131 kalmak \u00fczere haz\u0131r bulunmayan san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lmaz. Gelmemesinin ge\u00e7erli nedeni olmayan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n zorla getirilmesine karar verilir’ h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fc amir olup, bu kural\u0131n istisnalar\u0131 ayn\u0131 maddenin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “San\u0131k hakk\u0131nda, toplanan delillere g\u00f6re mahkumiyet d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi kan\u0131s\u0131na var\u0131l\u0131rsa, sorgusu yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olsa da dava yoklu\u011funda bitirilebilir’,<\/p>\n

    194. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “San\u0131k savu\u015fur veya ara vermeyi izleyen oturuma gelmezse \u00f6nceden sorguya \u00e7ekilmi\u015f ve art\u0131k haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131na mahkemece gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmezse dava yoklu\u011funda bitirilebilir’,<\/p>\n

    195. maddesinde; “Su\u00e7, yaln\u0131z veya birlikte adli para cezas\u0131n\u0131 veya m\u00fcsadereyi gerektirmekte ise san\u0131k gelmese bile duru\u015fma yap\u0131labilir. Bu gibi hallerde san\u0131\u011fa g\u00f6nderilecek davetiyede gelmese de duru\u015fman\u0131n yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131r,<\/p>\n

    200. maddesinin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda; “San\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcz\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 su\u00e7 ortaklar\u0131ndan birinin veya bir tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemeyece\u011finden endi\u015fe edilirse, mahkeme, sorgu ve dinleme s\u0131ras\u0131nda o san\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkeme salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verebilir,<\/p>\n

    204. maddesinde; “Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 sebebiyle haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n duru\u015fman\u0131n d\u00fczenli olarak y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesini tehlikeye sokaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda san\u0131k, duru\u015fma salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131r. Mahkeme san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131 dosyan\u0131n durumuna g\u00f6re savunmas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan zorunlu g\u00f6rmezse, oturumu yoklu\u011funda s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fcr ve bitirir. Ancak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n m\u00fcdafii yoksa, mahkeme barodan bir m\u00fcdafi g\u00f6revlendirilmesini ister. Oturuma yeniden al\u0131nmas\u0131na karar verilen san\u0131\u011fa yoklu\u011funda yap\u0131lan i\u015flemler a\u00e7\u0131klan\u0131r \u015feklinde g\u00f6sterilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Ayn\u0131 kanunun uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k konusunun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcne \u0131\u015f\u0131k tutan “san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmadan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmas\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 196. maddesi ise;<\/p>\n

    “1) Mahkemece sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan san\u0131k veya bu hususta san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde m\u00fcdafii isterse, mahkeme san\u0131\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmaktan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutabilir.<\/p>\n

    2-) San\u0131k, alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131l ve daha fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7lar hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere, istinabe suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilebilir. Sorgu i\u00e7in belirlenen g\u00fcn, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131yla san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiine bildirilir. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131yla m\u00fcdafiin sorgu s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 zorunlu de\u011fildir. Sorgusundan \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa, ifadesini esas mahkemesi huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011fi sorulur.<\/p>\n

    3-) Sorgu tutana\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada okunur.<\/p>\n

    4-) Yukar\u0131daki f\u0131kralar i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ayn\u0131 anda g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc ve sesli ileti\u015fim tekni\u011finin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle sorgusunun yap\u0131labilmesi olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde bu y\u00f6ntem uygulanarak sorgu yap\u0131l\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    5-) Hastal\u0131k veya disiplin \u00f6nlemi ya da zorunlu di\u011fer sebeplerle yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir hastahane veya tutukevine nakledilmi\u015f olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak ko\u015fuluyla, haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131na gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen oturumlar i\u00e7in getirilmemesine mahkemece karar verilebilir.<\/p>\n

    6-) Yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, belirlenen duru\u015fma tarihinde haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n zorlu\u011fu halinde, bu tarihten \u00f6nce duru\u015fma a\u00e7\u0131larak veya istinabe suretiyle sorgusu yap\u0131labilir bi\u00e7iminde d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Maddenin 1. f\u0131kras\u0131nda, mahkemece sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak \u015fart\u0131yla san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ya da bu hususta san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde m\u00fcdafiinin istemiyle duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmaktan vareste tutulabilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015f, 5. f\u0131kras\u0131nda ise hastal\u0131k veya disiplin \u00f6nlemi ya da zorunlu di\u011fer sebeplerle yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki hastane veya tutukevine nakledilmi\u015f olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, daha \u00f6nce sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak \u015fart\u0131yla haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131na gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen oturumlar i\u00e7in getirilmemesi hususunda mahkemece bir karar verilebilece\u011fi h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Maddenin her iki f\u0131kras\u0131nda da san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 hali duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulman\u0131n \u015fart\u0131 olarak belirtilmi\u015f, ancak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun ne \u015fekilde yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 hususunda herhangi bir a\u00e7\u0131klamaya yer verilmemi\u015f olup, bu konu maddenin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Bu d\u00fczenlemeye g\u00f6re, alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131ldan az hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7tan yarg\u0131lanmakta olan san\u0131\u011fa, sorgusundan \u00f6nce ifadesini esas mahkemesi huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011fi sorulduktan sonra istinabe suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilebilecektir. Alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131l ve daha fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7lardan dolay\u0131 ise san\u0131klar\u0131n sorgusunun mutlaka yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkemece yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunludur.<\/p>\n

    Sorgusundan \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa, ifadesini yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkeme huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011finin sorulmamas\u0131 veya sorulmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmak istemedi\u011fini belirten san\u0131\u011f\u0131n istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesiyle yetinilmesi, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furaca\u011f\u0131ndan mutlak bozma nedenidir.<\/p>\n

    C.M.K.nun 196. maddesinin 2. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k d\u00fczenlemesinden anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere, kanun koyucu, sorgunun yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda san\u0131klar\u0131n tutuklu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda herhangi bir ay\u0131r\u0131ma yer vermeyerek, yaln\u0131zca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 su\u00e7 i\u00e7in kanunda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen cezan\u0131n alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131n\u0131 esas alan ilkeyi benimsemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    San\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131, y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fck y\u00f6n\u00fc bulunmakla birlikte \u00f6ncelikle kendisi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan bir hak olup, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n temel unsurlar\u0131ndan birisini de te\u015fkil etmektedir. Taraf\u0131 oldu\u011fumuz ve onaylamakla i\u00e7 hukuk mevzuat\u0131m\u0131za dahil etti\u011fimiz Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 S\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin “Adil Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131” ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 6. maddesinin 3. f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (c) bendinde; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n en az\u0131ndan kendi kendisini savunmak hakk\u0131 bulundu\u011fu belirtilmekle, mahkeme huzurunda do\u011frudan savunmas\u0131n\u0131 yapabilmesi i\u00e7in duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r olma hakk\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 da z\u0131mnen kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Kendisi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden hak olarak d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi kabul edilen bir hususta san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu hakk\u0131 ne \u015fekilde kullanaca\u011f\u0131 konusunda hi\u00e7bir insiyatiflnin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc halinde hakk\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan da s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir.<\/p>\n

    Duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 san\u0131ktan kaynaklanan bir olumsuzluk olmaks\u0131z\u0131n onun istemi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ortadan kald\u0131ran ve zorunlu varesteli\u011fi \u00f6ng\u00f6ren 1412 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.U.K.nun 226. maddesinin 4. f\u0131kras\u0131nda yer alan; “duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmese bile, davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc yer mahkemesinin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7tan tutuklu veya cezas\u0131 infaz edilmekte olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu bulundu\u011fu yerdeki mahkeme arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla yapt\u0131r\u0131labilir \u015feklindeki d\u00fczenlemeye 1.6.2005 g\u00fcn\u00fc y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 5271 Say\u0131l\u0131 C.M.K.nda yer verilmeyerek, hem adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n temel unsurlar\u0131ndan birini olu\u015fturan duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 s\u0131n\u0131rlayan bir uygulamaya son verilmi\u015f, hem de \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 halinde san\u0131\u011fa sorgusunu istinabe yoluyla yapma imkan\u0131 verilmek suretiyle, \u00f6ncelikle san\u0131k y\u00f6n\u00fcnden bir hak olarak d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f olan duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma halinin san\u0131k i\u00e7in k\u00fclfet olu\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n da \u00f6n\u00fcne ge\u00e7ilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

    Nitekim Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesi’nin 12.2.1985 tarihli Colozza ve Rubinat\/\u0130talya ve 25.11.1997 tarihli Zana \/T\u00fcrkiye kararlar\u0131nda; “S\u00f6zle\u015fmeyle garanti alt\u0131na al\u0131nan bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131ndan vazge\u00e7ilmesi bunun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a s\u00f6ylenmesiyle m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilir4′ denilmek suretiyle, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131ndan feragat etmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    Bu bilgiler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut olay de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde;<\/p>\n

    Ya\u011fma su\u00e7una te\u015febb\u00fcsten yarg\u0131lanmakta olan ve davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan h\u00fckmen tutuklu bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusunun, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 mahkemece usul\u00fcne uygun olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi ve duru\u015fmada vareste tutulmak istedi\u011fini beyan eden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn tefhim edilece\u011fi celsede haz\u0131r bulunmak istedi\u011fine dair beyanda bulunmamas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, m\u00fcdafiinin haz\u0131r bulundu\u011fu oturuma getirtilmeden karar verilmesi savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde de\u011fildir.<\/p>\n

    Bu nedenle, yerel mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn, ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7tan mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tutuklu olan san\u0131k haz\u0131r bulundurulmadan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle BOZULMASINA dair \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131 isabetsizdir. Bu itibarla, itiraz\u0131n kabul\u00fcne, \u00d6zel Daire bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na veh\u00fckm\u00fcn esastan incelenebilmesi amac\u0131yla dosyan\u0131n \u00d6zel Daireye g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmelidir.<\/p>\n

    \u00c7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kat\u0131lmayan on Genel Kurul \u00dcyesi; “Ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7 sebebiyle mahkemenin yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda tutuklu bulunan san\u0131k haz\u0131r bulundurulmadan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131n\u0131n savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu, bu sebeple itiraz\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi” g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcyle kar\u015f\u0131 oy kullanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    SONU\u00c7 :<\/strong> A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle;<\/p>\n

    1-) Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 itiraz\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fcne,<\/p>\n

    2-) Yarg\u0131tay 6. Ceza Dairesinin 15.2.2012 g\u00fcn ve 17458-2248 Say\u0131l\u0131 bozma karar\u0131n\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na,<\/p>\n

    3-) Dosyan\u0131n h\u00fckm\u00fcn esas\u0131n\u0131n incelenebilmesi amac\u0131yla Yarg\u0131tay 6. Ceza Dairesine g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na tevdiine, 12.11.2013 tarihinde yap\u0131lan m\u00fczakerede oy\u00e7oklu\u011fuyla karar verildi.<\/p>\n

    12.02.1985 tarihli Colozza ve Rubinat \u2013 \u0130talya karar\u0131na konu olayda<\/span>;\u00a0<\/strong>san\u0131k eski adresinde bulunamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u00e7in \u201clatitante\u201d (aranan ki\u015fi) ilan edilerek, dava g\u0131yab\u0131nda s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015f ve san\u0131k mahkum edilmi\u015ftir. Su\u00e7la itham edilen herkesin \u0130HAS m.6\/3\u2019de s\u0131ralanan asgari haklara sahip oldu\u011funu belirten \u0130HAM; her bireyin, kendisine y\u00f6neltilen su\u00e7lamaya dair savunma, iddia tan\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 sorguya \u00e7ekme veya \u00e7ektirme, duru\u015fmada kullan\u0131lan dili anlamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya konu\u015famad\u0131\u011f\u0131 takdirde terc\u00fcman yard\u0131m\u0131ndan kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6demeksizin yararlanma hakk\u0131 ile g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ancak bu haklar\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n nas\u0131l kullan\u0131labilece\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131lmaz oldu\u011funu vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    02.03.1987 tarihli Monnel ve Moris \u2013 Birle\u015fik Krall\u0131k karar\u0131;\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>d\u00fcr\u00fcst yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n amac\u0131, cezai bir fiille itham edilen herkesin duru\u015fmalara bizzat kat\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131, bu yolla fiilen temsil edilmesini ve hukuken korunmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamakt\u0131r. Duru\u015fmaya bizzat kat\u0131lmayan san\u0131k, davan\u0131n maddi olaylar\u0131n\u0131 yeniden g\u00f6rme olana\u011f\u0131 bulamad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, d\u00fcr\u00fcst bir muhakemeden de yoksun b\u0131rak\u0131lacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n

    25.11.1997 tarihli Zana \u2013 T\u00fcrkiye karar\u0131nda \u0130HAM;<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0ba\u015fvurucunun usule ili\u015fkin itirazlarda bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n ve resmi dil d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda, ana dili ile savunma yapmay\u0131 talep etmesinin, hi\u00e7bir bi\u00e7imde savunma hakk\u0131ndan ve mahkeme huzuruna \u00e7\u0131kmaktan vazge\u00e7ildi\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmeyece\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. \u0130HAM\u2019a g\u00f6re; S\u00f6zle\u015fme ile g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan bir hakk\u0131n kullan\u0131lmas\u0131ndan vazge\u00e7ilmesi, ancak bunun a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a beyan edilmesi ile m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. E\u011fer ba\u015fvurucu duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunsa idi, somut olaya konu a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131n\u0131 yaparken kast\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011funu, r\u00f6portaj\u0131n hangi ko\u015fullarda yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade etme ve gazetecileri \u201ctan\u0131k\u201d s\u0131fat\u0131yla duru\u015fmaya davet etme ve r\u00f6portaj kayd\u0131n\u0131 isteme olanaklar\u0131na sahip olurdu. \u0130HAM\u2019a g\u00f6re; gerek san\u0131\u011f\u0131n tutuklu bulundu\u011fu yerdeki Mahkemece yap\u0131lan \u201cdolayl\u0131\u201d sorgu duru\u015fmas\u0131 ve gerekse davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc Mahkemece yap\u0131lan duru\u015fmaya san\u0131\u011f\u0131n avukatlar\u0131n\u0131n kat\u0131lmas\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun \u201cduru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma\u201d hakk\u0131 yerine ge\u00e7emez.<\/p>\n

    \u201cMuhakeme Hukukunu \u2018muhakeme\u2019 yapan, muhakemenin kolektif olu\u015fu, yani h\u00fckm\u00fcn kolektif verili\u015fidir. Taraflar da iddia ve m\u00fcdafaa makamlar\u0131na ge\u00e7ip h\u00fck\u00fcm verilmesine kat\u0131l\u0131rlar, karar veren hakimler de kolektif \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm verirler\u201d<\/em><\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

      \n
    • \n

      1412 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc Kanunu m.223\/3\u2019de, firar eden (ka\u00e7ak) san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve art\u0131k duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 mahkemece gerekli g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015fse, dava san\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u0131yab\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclerek bitirilebilir. 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu\u2019nun \u00f6zel yarg\u0131lanma usullerini d\u00fczenledi\u011fi \u201cKa\u00e7aklar\u0131n yarg\u0131lanmas\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnde yer verilen m.247\/3\u2019e g\u00f6re;\u00a0\u201cKa\u00e7ak san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda kovu\u015fturma yap\u0131labilir. Ancak, daha \u00f6nce sorgusu yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f ise, mahkumiyet karar\u0131 verilemez\u201d.\u00a0<\/em>Ka\u00e7ak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u0131yab\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen tasarruflar\u0131n ge\u00e7erlilik \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6ng\u00f6ren bu h\u00fckme g\u00f6re, mahkemece sorgusu yap\u0131lan ka\u00e7ak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u0131yab\u0131nda mahkumiyet karar\u0131 verilebilir. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcz\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131l\u0131p karar verilmesi hususunda di\u011fer bir istisnai hal ise CMK m.193\/2\u2019de d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Bu h\u00fckme g\u00f6re, duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmayan san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda, toplanan delillere g\u00f6re mahkumiyet d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bir karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi kan\u0131s\u0131na var\u0131l\u0131rsa, sorgusu yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015f olsa da dava yoklu\u011funda bitirilebilir.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      Yarg\u0131tay 16. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 19.06.2015 tarihli, 2015\/1076 E. ve 2015\/1932 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131;\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>\u201cDuru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131, d\u00fcr\u00fcst yarg\u0131lanama hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmekte olup, bu hakk\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 ancak ciddi \u015fekilde gerekli olmas\u0131 halinde \u2018istisna\u2019 olarak uygulanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu sebeple kovu\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda;<\/em><\/p>\n

      1-\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>Genel kural san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131d\u0131r. Bu hak ciddi nedenlere dayal\u0131 olarak mahkeme karar\u0131 ile s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131labilir,<\/em><\/p>\n

      2-\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>\u0130lk ve son savunman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, esasa ili\u015fkin delillerin topland\u0131\u011f\u0131 oturumlara san\u0131\u011f\u0131n SEGB\u0130S yolu ile kat\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k kabul\u00fcne dayal\u0131 olmal\u0131d\u0131r,<\/em><\/p>\n

      3)<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0Sesli ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc y\u00f6ntemle savunma al\u0131nmas\u0131 halinde san\u0131k m\u00fcdafisinin talebi durumunda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yan\u0131nda bulunma olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n sa\u011flanmas\u0131; ko\u015fullar\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015fti\u011finde savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilebilecektir.<\/em><\/p>\n

      T\u00fcm bu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda; esas hakk\u0131nda son savunmas\u0131n\u0131 duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunarak yapmak istedi\u011fini beyan eden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulundurulmay\u0131p SEGB\u0130S sistemi arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 yap\u0131larak mahkumiyetine karar verilmesi suretiyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131\u201d<\/em>\u00a0 BOZMA<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

      Yarg\u0131tay 2. Ceza Dairesi 09.03.2015 tarihli, 2015\/872 E. ve 2015\/4797 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda;<\/strong><\/span>\u201cFiilin su\u00e7 olu\u015fturmamas\u0131 nedeniyle derhal beraat karar\u0131 verilmesi d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda,<\/u>\u00a0delillerin takdir ve tayini gereken durumlarda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131l\u0131p savunmas\u0131 saptanmadan beraat karar\u0131 verilemeyece\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK m.193\/2\u2019ye yanl\u0131\u015f anlam verilerek an\u0131lan Kanunun 191 ve 147. maddeleri gere\u011fince san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmadan yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131\u201d\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n

      Yarg\u0131tay 15. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 21.10.2014 tarihli, 2014\/17759 E. ve 2014\/16919 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131;\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>mahkemeye gelmemi\u015f san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda duru\u015fma yap\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin kural\u0131n istisnas\u0131, eylemin su\u00e7 olu\u015fturmayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 halinde verilen beraat karar\u0131 ile s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131d\u0131r. Bu sebeple; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n, mevcut deliller tart\u0131\u015f\u0131larak ve delil de\u011ferlendirilmesi a\u015famas\u0131na ge\u00e7mek suretiyle beraat karar\u0131 verilmesi bozma sebebi say\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n

      Yarg\u0131tay 13. Ceza Dairesi 01.10.2014 tarihli, 2014\/29387 E. ve 2014\/27361 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131;\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>ceza infaz kurumunda ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan tutuklu bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n,\u00a0\u201cduru\u015fmalardan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulma hususunda beyan\u0131 olmaks\u0131z\u0131n, son oturumda haz\u0131r bulundurulmaks\u0131z\u0131n yoklu\u011funda yarg\u0131lamaya devam edilip h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne karar verilemeyece\u011fi, bu yolla savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanamayaca\u011f\u0131\u201d\u00a0<\/em>gerek\u00e7esiyle, CMK m.193\/1 ve m.196\/5 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 \u015fekilde verilen Yerel Mahkeme karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na…<\/p>\n

        \n
      • 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu\u2019nun \u201cSan\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmadan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmas\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 196. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen istisna halleri,\u00a0ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 usul\u00fcnde ge\u00e7erlili\u011fini etkin \u015fekilde koruyan \u201cy\u00fczy\u00fczelik\u201d ilkesinin ender ayr\u0131cal\u0131klar\u0131ndan biri olup, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n i\u015fledi\u011fi su\u00e7un t\u00fcr\u00fc ve \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen cezas\u0131n\u0131n miktar\u0131 ne olursa olsun; \u201cduru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmay\u0131 talep etmek\u201d gibi, yaln\u0131zca san\u0131\u011fa ve yetkili k\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde m\u00fcdafine tan\u0131nan vazge\u00e7ilmez nitelikte bir savunma hakk\u0131d\u0131r.CMK m.196\/1\u2019e g\u00f6re;\u00a0\u201cMahkemece sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan san\u0131k veya bu hususta san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde m\u00fcdafi isterse, mahkeme san\u0131\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmaktan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutabilir\u201d.<\/em>\u00a0\u00a0Mahkeme, san\u0131k veya onun ad\u0131na yetkilendirdi\u011fi m\u00fcdafi taraf\u0131ndan talep edilmedi\u011fi s\u00fcrece, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmalardan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmas\u0131na karar veremeyece\u011fine g\u00f6re; yaln\u0131zca san\u0131\u011fa tan\u0131nan \u201c\u00f6zg\u00fc\u201d nitelikli bu hakk\u0131n, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 amac\u0131na hizmet etti\u011fi ve d\u00fcr\u00fcst yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 ile do\u011frudan ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu hususunda tart\u0131\u015fma olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatindeyiz.CMK m.196\/<\/em>2\u2019ye g\u00f6re;\u00a0san\u0131k, alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131l ve daha fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7lar hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere, istinabe suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilebilir.\u00a0Sorgusundan \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa, ifadesini esas mahkemesi huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011fi sorulur.\u00a0Alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131l ve daha fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7lar sebebiyle yap\u0131lacak san\u0131k sorgusunun mutlaka yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkemece ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi zorunludur.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

        Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu 01.10.2013 tarihli, 2013\/7-73 E. ve 2013\/401 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131;<\/span><\/strong>\u201cSorgusundan \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa, ifadesini yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan mahkeme huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011finin sorulmamas\u0131 veya sorulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine duru\u015fmadan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutulmak istemedi\u011fini belirtmesine ra\u011fmen istinabe yoluyla al\u0131nan ifadesi ile yetinilmesi savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furacakt\u0131r\u2026\u00a0Kendisi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden \u2018hak\u2019 olarak d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi kabul edilen bir hususta, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bu hakk\u0131 ne \u015fekilde kullanaca\u011f\u0131na dair hi\u00e7bir inisiyatifinin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kabul\u00fc halinde, hakk\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan da s\u00f6z edilemeyecektir.\u00a0Bu sebeple, sorgusundan \u00f6nce ifadesini as\u0131l mahkemesinde vermek isteyip istemedi\u011finin sorulmamas\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 niteli\u011finde olup, Yerel Mahkemenin usule ayk\u0131r\u0131 h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131na\u201d\u00a0<\/em>karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

        Yarg\u0131tay 16. Ceza Dairesi,<\/span><\/strong>\u201c<\/em>Esas hakk\u0131nda son savunmas\u0131n\u0131 duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunarak yapmak istedi\u011fini beyan eden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulundurulmay\u0131p, SEGB\u0130S sistemi arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131yla yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 yap\u0131larak mahkumiyetine karar verilmesi suretiyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 isabetsizdir\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

        \u201cSan\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkemeden uzakla\u015fmas\u0131\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 CMK m.194\/2<\/span>;<\/strong>\u201cSan\u0131k savu\u015fur veya ara vermeyi izleyen oturuma gelmezse, \u00f6nceden sorguya \u00e7ekilmi\u015f ve art\u0131k haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131na mahkemece gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmezse, dava yoklu\u011funda bitirilebilir\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n

        \u201cSan\u0131k yoklu\u011funda duru\u015fma\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 CMK m.195<\/strong><\/span>;<\/span><\/strong>\u201cSu\u00e7, yaln\u0131z veya birlikte adli para cezas\u0131n\u0131 veya m\u00fcsadereyi gerektirmekte ise; san\u0131k gelmese bile duru\u015fma yap\u0131labilir. Bu gibi hallerde san\u0131\u011fa g\u00f6nderilecek davetiyede gelmese de duru\u015fman\u0131n yap\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 yaz\u0131l\u0131r\u201d.\u00a0Bu h\u00fck\u00fcm, \u00f6n \u00f6deme ve uzla\u015fma kapsam\u0131ndaki su\u00e7lar i\u00e7in uygulanmaz.Yarg\u0131tay 2. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 28.04.2010 tarihli ve 11981\/14123 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131;\u00a0<\/strong><\/span>san\u0131\u011f\u0131n etkili eylem olarak tespit edilen su\u00e7unu cezai yapt\u0131r\u0131ma ba\u011flayan TCK m.86\/2\u2019de, hapis ve adli para cezas\u0131n\u0131n se\u00e7enekli yapt\u0131r\u0131m olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclmesi sebebiyle, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sorgusu yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmak suretiyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131 sonucu do\u011furan Yerel Mahkeme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn kanun yarar\u0131na bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

        CMK\u00a0 m.197\u2019de \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen\u00a0\u201cSan\u0131k haz\u0131r bulunmasa da m\u00fcdafii b\u00fct\u00fcn oturumlarda haz\u0131r bulunmak yetkisine sahiptir\u201d\u00a0<\/em>h\u00fckm\u00fc gere\u011fince;\u00a0san\u0131\u011f\u0131 temsilen duru\u015fmaya kat\u0131lan m\u00fcdafii, san\u0131k huzurda olmasa bile, t\u00fcm oturumlara kat\u0131lma hakk\u0131na sahip olup, mahkemece duru\u015fmaya kabul edilmek zorundad\u0131r. Ancak m\u00fcdafi huzurunda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen i\u015flemler, ayr\u0131ca san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilmez.<\/p>\n

          \n
        • \u201cSorgu s\u0131ras\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkeme salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131labilmesi\u201d ba\u015fl\u0131kl\u0131 CMK m.200\u2019e g\u00f6re;\u00a0su\u00e7 ortaklar\u0131ndan birinin veya bir tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n san\u0131\u011f\u0131n y\u00fcz\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 ger\u00e7e\u011fi s\u00f6ylemeyece\u011finden endi\u015fe edilirse, sorgu ve dinleme s\u0131ras\u0131nda o san\u0131\u011f\u0131n mahkeme salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verebilir ve san\u0131k tekrar getirildi\u011finde, tutanaklar okunur ve gerekti\u011finde i\u00e7eri\u011fi anlat\u0131l\u0131r. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fma salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131, bu h\u00fck\u00fcm haricinde,\u00a0CMK m.204\u2019de \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen\u00a0halde m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 sebebiyle, haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n duru\u015fman\u0131n d\u00fczenli olarak y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesini tehlikeye sokaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan san\u0131k, duru\u015fma salonundan \u00e7\u0131karabilir. Ancak her iki ihtimalde de, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fma salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131, m\u00fcdafiinin duru\u015fma salonunda bulunmas\u0131na engel de\u011fildir.Benzer durum, CMK m.58\/3\u2019de de \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. \u0130lgili h\u00fckme g\u00f6re;\u00a0\u201cHaz\u0131r bulunanlar\u0131n huzurunda dinlenmesi, tan\u0131k i\u00e7in a\u011f\u0131r bir tehlike te\u015fkil edecek ve bu tehlike ba\u015fka t\u00fcrl\u00fc \u00f6nlenemeyecekse ya da maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan tehlike olu\u015fturacaksa; hakim, haz\u0131r bulunma hakk\u0131na sahip bulunanlar olmadan da tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 dinleyebilir. Tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n dinlenmesi s\u0131ras\u0131nda ses ve g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc aktarma yap\u0131l\u0131r. Soru sorma hakk\u0131 sakl\u0131d\u0131r\u201d.<\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          San\u0131\u011f\u0131n, yoklu\u011funda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen i\u015flemler hakk\u0131nda bilgilendirilmesi zorunludur;<\/strong><\/span>zira bu i\u015flem ve a\u00e7\u0131klamalara kar\u015f\u0131 san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekecektir. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fma salonundan \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 hususunda,\u00a0\u201c\u2026karar verme yetkisi mahkemenindir ve karar verilmeden \u00f6nce cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcn al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu karar\u0131 ba\u015fkan de\u011fil, mahkeme kurulu verebilir. Belirtilen \u015fartlar\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde yaln\u0131zca san\u0131\u011f\u0131n d\u0131\u015far\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 s\u00f6zkonusu olur, bu durum m\u00fcdafiinin d\u0131\u015far\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furmaz\u201d.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

          \u00a0Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 05.06.2012 tarihli, 2012\/1-656 E. ve 2012\/222 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131<\/strong><\/span>\u201c\u2026Kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7unun, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 CMK m.247 ve 248\u2019de ka\u00e7aklar hakk\u0131nda \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen katalog su\u00e7lar aras\u0131nda yer almad\u0131\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, san\u0131klar\u0131n bizzat duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r edilerek savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 ve de\u011fi\u015fen su\u00e7 niteli\u011fine g\u00f6re ek savunma haklar\u0131n\u0131n verilmesi gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeyerek CMK m.193 ve 226 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 hareket edilmesi\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

          Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 18.11.2014 tarihli, 2013\/4-424 E. ve 2014\/496 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131<\/strong>;\u00a0<\/span>\u201c\u2026aleyhe olan bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beyan\u0131 al\u0131nmadan direnme h\u00fckm\u00fc verilip verilemeyece\u011fi hususunun \u00f6ncelikle de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir. Ancak Yerel Mahkeme, bozmadan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada san\u0131k ad\u0131na duru\u015fma davetiyesi \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, ancak davetiyenin tebli\u011f edilemedi\u011fi, aleyhine olan bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 diyecekleri sorulmadan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yoklu\u011funda \u00f6nceki h\u00fck\u00fcmde direnilmesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.\u00a0San\u0131\u011fa, bozmada belirtilen ve aleyhinde sonu\u00e7 do\u011furacak olan hususlarda beyanda bulunma, kendisini savunma ve bu hususta delillerini sunma imkan\u0131 tan\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r.\u00a0Bu d\u00fczenleme, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanamayaca\u011f\u0131 ilkesine dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, uyulmas\u0131nda zorunluluk bulunan emredici kurallardand\u0131r\u201d.<\/em><\/p>\n

          Bozma karar\u0131ndan sonra yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada, ba\u015fka su\u00e7tan h\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc olan san\u0131k duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r edilmeksizin, san\u0131k yoklu\u011fundan Yerel Mahkemece direnme karar\u0131 verilmesinin, savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kabul eden Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu;\u00a0bozma karar\u0131 lehe olsa dahi, duru\u015fmadan haberdar edilerek savunma yapma hakk\u0131 tan\u0131nmayan ve mahkemede haz\u0131r edilmeyen san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, bozma ilam\u0131ndan haberdar edilmesi ve bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 bildirme olana\u011f\u0131 sunulmas\u0131 gerekirken, bu usuli zorunlulu\u011fa uyulmaks\u0131z\u0131n yarg\u0131lamaya devam edilmesinin ve savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tlanmas\u0131<\/span><\/strong>suretiyle san\u0131k yoklu\u011funda karar verilmesinin, CMUK m.326\/2 ve m.308\/8\u2019e ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funa karar vermektedir.<\/p>\n

          Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu 20.04.1992 tarihli, 1992\/5-56 E. ve 1992\/107 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131;<\/span><\/strong>\u201c<\/em>San\u0131\u011f\u0131n yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 su\u00e7tan tutuklu oldu\u011fu, sorguya \u00e7ekilmedi\u011fi, esasl\u0131 i\u015flemlerin yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda CMUK m.223\/3, m.226\/4-son maddeleri uygulanmayaca\u011f\u0131ndan, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmaya celbedilerek savunma yapmas\u0131na olanak tan\u0131nmamas\u0131\u201d\u00a0<\/em>gerek\u00e7esi ile san\u0131\u011f\u0131n talimat yaz\u0131larak bulundu\u011fu yer mahkemesi arac\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 ile savunmas\u0131 al\u0131n\u0131p mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc kurulamayaca\u011f\u0131na, bu sebeple Yerel Mahkemenin direnme h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

          Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu 19.04.2005 tarihli, 2005\/1-19 E. ve 2005\/40 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131na konu somut olayda<\/span>;\u00a0<\/strong>bozma \u00f6ncesi yarg\u0131lamada ilk iki oturumda haz\u0131r bulunup sorgusu icra edilen san\u0131k K. Atilla daha sonra Malatya Kapal\u0131 Cezaevine sevk edilmi\u015f, bir tak\u0131m kan\u0131tlar\u0131n toplan\u0131p tart\u0131\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 di\u011fer on be\u015f oturuma getirtilmemi\u015f, esasa ili\u015fkin savunmas\u0131 istinabe suretiyle saptan\u0131p, yoklu\u011funda mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir. Bozma sonras\u0131 yarg\u0131lamada ise, g\u00fcvenlik gere\u011fi Bakanl\u0131k emirleri do\u011frultusunda ba\u015fka yer cezaevine nakledildi\u011fi gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6sterilerek hi\u00e7bir oturumda haz\u0131r bulundurulmayan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, bozmaya ve cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n esas hakk\u0131ndaki d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesine kar\u015f\u0131 diyecekleri ile son s\u00f6ze ili\u015fkin savunmas\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 gibi i\u015flemler istinabe suretiyle yerine getirilerek yoklu\u011funda mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc kurulmu\u015ftur.Y\u00fcksek Mahkeme,\u00a0\u201c\u2026Bozma san\u0131klar lehine olup mutlaka dinlenilmeleri zorunlulu\u011fu bulunmamakta ise de; tutuklu bulunan san\u0131klar\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulundurulmalar\u0131 cumhuriyet savc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan istenmeli, bozma karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 diyecekleri sorulmal\u0131, kan\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131 sunma ve kendilerini bizzat savunma olana\u011f\u0131 tan\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. Bu ilke savunma hakk\u0131na ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fundan, duru\u015fmadan vareste tutulmay\u0131 talep etseler bile yarg\u0131lama konusu su\u00e7tan tutuklu bulunan san\u0131klar\u0131n savunmas\u0131 talimatla al\u0131nmamal\u0131d\u0131r. San\u0131k hakk\u0131nda CMUK m.226\/son uyar\u0131nca zorunlu nedenlerden dolay\u0131 duru\u015fmaya celbedilmemesine karar verilmi\u015f ise de, bu karar\u0131n sadece ilgili oturumlar\u0131 kapsamas\u0131, sonraki oturumlar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yeniden bir karar verilmemesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 su\u00e7tan tutuklu bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulundurulup bozmaya kar\u015f\u0131 diyeceklerinin sorulmas\u0131 gerekirken talimatla diyeceklerinin sorulmas\u0131, CMUK m. 223 ve m.226\/son madde h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olup savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 k\u0131s\u0131tlad\u0131\u011f\u0131<\/span><\/strong>\u201d\u00a0<\/em>gerek\u00e7esiyle, bu hususun mutlak bozma sebebi te\u015fkil etti\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

          CMK m.196<\/strong>;<\/strong><\/span>\u00a0\u201c1) Mahkemece sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olan san\u0131k veya bu hususta san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hallerde m\u00fcdafi isterse, mahkeme san\u0131\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada haz\u0131r bulunmaktan ba\u011f\u0131\u015f\u0131k tutabilir. 2)\u00a0<\/em>San\u0131k, alt s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 be\u015f y\u0131l ve daha fazla hapis cezas\u0131n\u0131 gerektiren su\u00e7lar hari\u00e7 olmak \u00fczere, istinabe suretiyle sorguya \u00e7ekilebilir. Sorgu i\u00e7in belirlenen g\u00fcn, Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ile san\u0131k ve m\u00fcdafiine bildirilir. Cumhuriyet savc\u0131s\u0131 ile m\u00fcdafiin sorgu s\u0131ras\u0131nda haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131 zorunlu de\u011fildir. Sorgusundan \u00f6nce san\u0131\u011fa, ifadesini esas mahkemesi huzurunda vermek isteyip istemedi\u011fi sorulur.\u00a03) Sorgu tutana\u011f\u0131 duru\u015fmada okunur. 4) Yukar\u0131daki f\u0131kralar i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ayn\u0131 anda g\u00f6r\u00fcnt\u00fcl\u00fc ve sesli ileti\u015fim tekni\u011finin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle sorgusunun yap\u0131labilmesi olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 halinde bu y\u00f6ntem uygulanarak sorgu yap\u0131l\u0131r. 5) Hastal\u0131k veya disiplin \u00f6nlemi ya da zorunlu di\u011fer nedenlerle yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 yarg\u0131 \u00e7evresi d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki bir hastane veya tutukevine nakledilmi\u015f olan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, sorgusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f olmak ko\u015fuluyla, haz\u0131r bulundurulmas\u0131na gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmeyen oturumlar i\u00e7in getirilmemesine mahkemece karar verilebilir. 6) Yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda bulunan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n, belirlenen duru\u015fma tarihinde haz\u0131r bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n zorlu\u011fu halinde, bu tarihten \u00f6nce duru\u015fma a\u00e7\u0131larak veya istinabe suretiyle sorgusu yap\u0131labilir\u201d.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n