    12- 3456- It is proven that the mobile phones of the victims and a cash amount are with the culprits. It is proven that the car of the complainant has been broken off, so he left it besides the watchman, accompanied by the plaintiff witness who is his niece. The defense lawyer agreed that the registration of the judicial admissions collectively contradicts to what is concluded by the criminal courts. The defense (accused) states that they found the victims in abnormal position under a tree, so they committed this action, but this defense is unfounded for the following: The woman is his niece. If the defense is reasonable, there shall be a legal irregularity committed by the culprits proved by their ability to lead them to the police station or action by opening an ordinance and prove the crime, the thing that didn’t happen. The defense shall not be accepted due to the ignorance of the law against committing a crime. The exhibits are found in the possession of the accused. Due to the occurred violence, the defendants’ clothes were torn up. It is found that the rescue and escape from the culprits’ evils is to scream through which the plaintiff witness concluded that, so there is no doubt in the validity of the conviction. This is previously mentioned: Sudanese Government Against Amr Garbo Othman SC/MKM 154/1977 P168 Magazine: 1977 In case of committing more than one crime by the convicted, the court must direct several convictions to him by the number of the committed crimes and discuss the items of each crime separately and imposing one punishment that is the most extreme punishment.   I think that only one conviction may be directed, including in detail the content of article 145 Criminal Procedures of 1991 clearly as it stated: “if the single action formed more than one crime, the punishments overlap and only one punishment shall be applied that is the maximum punishment. Whereas the facts of this ordinance became clear and there is a strong connection that leads to a clear understanding that is they committed the crimes attributed to them, and it is proven before the judges and included in previous case of: Sudanese Government Against Idris Ali Bilal SC/MK/145/178 P384 Magazine: 1978