The Federal Supreme Court has established a legal principle that the issuance by a defendant of multiple checks for one person in one day and one transaction is an indivisible criminal activity and that the criminal proceedings are adjudicated by a conviction or acquittal in any of them.
The judge ruled that a defendant in the case of a check without balance, as it turned out that the check is one of the checks issued by the accused to the complainant for the same treatment, and issued a criminal judgment in a previous case.
In the details, the Public Prosecution referred a defendant to a criminal trial on charges of giving a bad check in bad faith, demanding that he be punished.
In absentia, the first instance court sentenced the accused to four months' imprisonment for his charge, obliged him to pay the due fee and was supported by the Court of Appeal.
The defendant did not hesitate to serve the sentence and appealed to him by way of cassation before the Federal Supreme Court, and the Public Prosecution submitted a memorandum of opinion, requesting the rejection of the appeal.
The defendant said in his appeal that the sentence violated the right of defense, as he paid the non-consideration of the case for the previous dismissal by virtue of a previous criminal case and that the check subject of the case was written in the same purpose and that the request to include the file of the said case and hear the witness who was present for the delivery of the check subject The case with the checks in which the above-mentioned judgment was issued, but the appeal judgment put forward this fundamental defense.
The Court supported the appeal, stating that the issuance of multiple checks in favor of a single person for a single transaction, regardless of the date or value of each transaction, is an indivisible criminal activity, for which the criminal case is terminated, as required by the first paragraph of article 268 of The Code of Criminal Procedure with the issuance of one final judgment of conviction or innocence in the issuance of any check therein.
She pointed out that the second paragraph of the article provided that if a judgment was issued on the subject of a criminal case, it may only be reconsidered by appealing this judgment in the manner prescribed by law.
The appeal was rejected by the defendant in his reasons, and the testimony of the witness who held the defendant on his testimony was not verified to prove the fact of the handover of the check in question. Of the checks in the previous case, and the ruling did not show his document, which derived from him saying that these checks of different transactions, the provision has violated the right of defense and the lack of causation, which can not Court of Cassation to exercise control over the application of the law correctly applied to the incident, As has been proved in the To judge what should be revoked and referred.