In the name of God the most gracious the most merciful NATIONAL SUPREME COURT Criminal Circuit Before: Bakr Mohamed Bakr Abdulatif Hussain Alfaki Alameen Mohamed Al Nazeer Ahmed Head Member Member TRIAL OF Zainab Mohamed Idris No. 23/2017 JUDGMENT The appellant was convicted under section 159 of the penal Code 1991, and punished by a fine equal to SP 300, and if she does not pay she will be punished with imprisonment for two years, however, she was discharged for good conduct, this judgment has been issued by Umbada Civil Court. Following an appeal to the Public Court, the conviction and punishment had been cancelled, whereupon, she requested permission against her ex-husband (divorcer) the complainant, to initiate criminal procedures against him. The Trial Court refused to grant her permission and the claim was rejected. The claim has also been rejected by the Court of Appeal, therefore, this claim was made, which she named it as review, based on a mistake of the court of Appeal when it had upheld the judgment issued by Umbada Public Court and requested that this decision shall be reconsidered. In form:The claim can be treated pursuant to our power under section 188 of the Criminal Procedures Act. In subject: Without going into the details of the Court of Appeal’s merits, which was right in its conclusion, I believe the following: First: the right of litigation is guaranteed to the public at large whenever there is preliminary evidence, as it is a natural and constitutional right before being a legal right. Second: if we state otherwise, people would refrain from litigating, in fear of being subject to accusation if they have not proved their allegation. Third; in our case, there was a preliminary evidence which led to the initiation of the proceedings by the Public Prosecution until it had been referred to the Court, which had decided conviction and punishment, and then the judgment had been cancelled by the Public Court, which does not give her the right to pursue her divorcer because she has only