KCC 248, 1136/2017
This case involved two defendants accused of seizing money with forged documents. A key issue was whether the same judges could consider the case of one defendant which had considered the appeal of the other.
Background
The office of public prosecution accused two defendants of forging formal documents in order to seize money from a victim. The office requested the court to penalise the defendants according to the relevant laws.
The court ruled that the defendants should be imprisoned for three years and they should be deported from the country after the execution of the punishment.
The second defendant appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court upheld the appealed ruling.
The two defendants appealed the ruling before the court of cassation.
Decision
Appeal No. 1136/2017
The first defendant said in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law. He said that the board of judges which had issued the ruling was the same board that considered the appeal made by the other defendant and therefore the ruling should be considered invalid.