The office of public prosecution accused a defendant of forging formal documents and stamps. The office requested the court to penalize the defendant according to the relevant laws.

The court ruled that the defendant should be imprisoned for three years. The court ruled that the ruling would be suspended if the defendant paid a guarantee of 500 Dinars. The court ruled that the forged documents and stamps should be confiscated.

The defendant and the office appealed the ruling before the court of appeal. The court amended the appealed ruling and ruled that the defendant should be imprisoned for two years and that the ruling should be suspended for three years.

The defendant appealed the ruling before the court of cassation. He said in his grounds of appeal that the ruling had erred in the application of law. He said that the witnesses’ testimonies upon which the ruling was established were invalid.

The court said that this argument was invalid. The court said that the case documents had revealed that the witnesses’ testimonies had complied with the material evidence of the crime.