After taking the necessary steps and completing the investigations, the documents were sent to the court. After hearing the parties, the impugned judgment was delivered, and the appeal court concluded the situation in eastern Darfur Al-Da'in. We agree with the findings of the courts below that, in reviewing the evidence adduced by the accuser, it has not been proven that the accused committed the offense unequivocally. According to the law, the accuser in criminal cases must prove the offense of the accused undoubtedly. See case law H.S against Ibrahim Al-Ghali Sulaiman (Journal of Judicial Judgments 1976). The evidence presented to the complainant was limited to her testimony, citing her daughter, who alleged that the accused had raped her. The medical report indicated that the victim was pregnant, but did not provide any further evidence of the charge of the victim being sexually assaulted. The case was closed six months after the victim's request and the accuser did not prove that the accused was bound by the allegation that the accused was not shown with the victim in a contrary situation to ethics. The testimony of one of the witnesses (in the minutes of the hearing) indicated that the accused was outside the dorms on a mission (Meiz) when the victim was present on the day of the incident. As a result, the victim's request is not enough, due to the failure to provide evidence to prove the harassment or rape of the victim. The record of the trial is that no evidence has been found. In such a case, it is necessary to corroborate the testimony of the victim, and to see the precedent of the Sudanese government against the judgments of the magazine Omar Muhammad al-Amin of 1976, which was what failed to impeach him. As regards the request of the applicant's lawyer for the 1991 Code of Criminal Procedure, which is fixed in the record of the trial, the case is closed, and we therefore do not see the need to return the documents to the trial court for a new hearing. The parties to the case did not request to hear or dismiss any of the witnesses, and the trial court did not itself find it necessary to hear or reexamine a witness. In addition to section 30 of the 1994 Evidence Act, the charge failed to connect the accused to the offense beyond the stage of doubt and to prove his connection to the victim of harassment or rape. There was no evidence of this, and the charge alone proved the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. H.S against Abas Mohammad Salam (Journal of Judicial Judgments 1973). As a result, the decisions of lower courts have been judicious. So, I see if colleagues agree, I see that: 1- Support the judgment of the lower courts. 2- Cancel the appeal.