The office of public prosecution accused two defendants of forging formal documents. The office requested the court to penalize the defendants according to the relevant laws.

The court refused to announce the ruling on the condition that the defendants demonstrated good conduct for two years.

The office appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court dismissed the appealed ruling and acquitted the defendants.

The office appealed the ruling before the court of cassation. The office said in its grounds of appeal that the ruling had insufficient evidence of causation. The office said that the court had acquitted the defendants although the testimonies of the witnesses and police officers contradicted the testimonies of the defendants.

The court said that this argument was valid. The court said that the court had failed to consider the case properly and had ignored the testimonies of the witnesses and police officers about the forgery incident.

The court repealed the appealed ruling