and that she was presented with medical bodies and from the testimonial of the undertaker the second and third accused were present with the first accused and that they were handed the remains to be disposed of, when they were brought into custody they completely denied the accusation which led the persecution instruction to file a claim under article 97 Ghaf. J. against them, when the investigation was complete, the three accused were brought to trial and the court of the first instance decided to reject the claim and acquitted them, the appeal court agreed and approved the rejection of the claim but modified the decision from rejection to equitation and the court is correct in doing so because the rejection happens after the investigation and before the accusation but should the court reach a proving evidence that justifies the charge and indeed that was the course of action, then its decision would not be to reject but to equate should the evidence does not prove sufficient ground for the accusation. After reviewing all related documents, I believe the court was justified on its verdict. The accusation failed to provide beyond any reasonable doubt evidence that would tie the defendant with the aligned crime for the medical decision confirmed the absence of any trace of recent pregnancy and it is customary for the accusation to provide conclusive and beyond any reasonable doubt proof I find that that accusation has failed to do so and what evidence provided is not sufficient ground that would lead to such an accusation given the reason that a witness has testified that there are many causes that would lead to womb cleaning such as clotting of the monasterial blood which is in turn is a doubt in favor of the defendant, as to the appellant’s claim that the court should have contacted the doctor who made the operation and to complete the hospital to bring her forward we reply that the court is an impartial entity and does not take sides with the accusation and that the court’s only liable to pass judgement on the case at hand and does not seek to condemn the accused nor to seek evidence to justify the accusation since these acts are the sole responsibility of the prosecution for the judge does not complete the text related to the investigation for the only reason that in doing so the judge will lose his or her impartiality and thus become part of the persecution for the investigation, observations and deduction is the sole responsibility of the persecution, and since this evidence is not sufficient to accusation the defendant is therefore acquitted, this is what the court of the first instance has deduced and where the appeal court have agreed to the verdict of the court of the first instance, its decision was in accordance of the laws, as to the second and third accused, I am of the opinion that the judges of the lower courts have reached a valid decision in their favor for all the above mentioned and should my fellow judges agree with my opinion, I am of the opinion of the followings: 1. Agree with the appeals court’s decision 2. Parties shall be notified And God’s help and guidance we seek (signature) Dalya Basheer Siraj Supreme Court Judge 16/1/2017 Second Opinion: I agree and approve of the above mentioned (signature) Ali Al Shareef Dhaw Al Beat Supreme Court Judge 18/1/2017