In the name of God the Merciful
National Supreme Court
State Department of Greater Darfur
Criminal Chamber
In front of :
Mr. Hassan Abdelkrim Othman

President

Mr. Hashem Ibrahim A-Tom

Member

Mr. Dr. Sulaiman Mohammad Shaib Member
Number: M A / T G / 49/2018
Trial
Haitham Mohammad Sharaf al-Din
Judgment
The counsel for the appellant, Muhammad Ali Abdurrahman, filed an appeal against the decision
of the State Court of Appeals of the State of East Darfur, in accordance to his memorandum No.
ASG / 410/2017 supporting the decision of the Court of First Instance and dismissing the appeal.
The counsel argued that the decisions of the lower courts were unlawful, as the trial court
violated section 30 of the 1994 Evidence Act by refusing to seek technical advice and opinions
from the courts experts, by refusing the prosecution's application in connection with the genetic
DNA test. The court does not assist the litigants against themselves and presenting the evidence
at the trial stage is not correct. Article 153 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1991 provides:
"The court may, alone or at the request of the accused or the defense, at any time before the
verdict ..."
The exploitation of the trial court by force of evidence does not mean that there is arbitrariness
and tyranny of the decision. For other reasons relating to the weight and adaptation of the
evidence, he requested at the end of his memorandum to set aside the judgments of the trial and
appellate courts, as well as to return the evidence. The court of First Instance, and the court of
appeal, returned the papers and accepted the application and heard further evidence.
The appeal was filed on January 30, 2018 with a receipt of a copy of the decision of the Court of
Appeal, according to the attached affidavit, in January 18, 2018; therefore, the request was
registered within the deadlines provided for, in article 183 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of
1991.
After examining all the documents, the facts contained the actions of the applicant in pursuing
the criminal case against the accused, in which it stated that he had raped his daughter before the
office of the family and children Da’in

Select target paragraph3