I. Giri\u015f<\/p>\n
Yaralama fiilinin \u00f6l\u00fcmle neticelendi\u011fi durumlarda su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayini, yani fiilin neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f yaralama (TCK m.87\/4) su\u00e7u mu, yoksa insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme (TCK m.81) su\u00e7u kapsam\u0131nda m\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi, bu su\u00e7lar i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen cezalar dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan fail i\u00e7in hayatidir. \u00d6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi, \u00f6zellikle neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f kasten yaralama ile kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131mda b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle, kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7u ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7u aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 kriterden en \u00f6nemlisi manevi unsur farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla; su\u00e7un vas\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken konu, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi, yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkindir. Bu yaz\u0131m\u0131zda; ay\u0131r\u0131ma esas te\u015fkil eden \u201c\u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131n\u201d varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti i\u00e7in dikkate al\u0131nan \u015fartlara\/kriterlere ve konu ile ilgili hukuki de\u011ferlendirmelere yer verece\u011fiz.<\/p>\n
II. Geli\u015fme<\/p>\n
Farkl\u0131 sonu\u00e7lara yol a\u00e7mas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6\u011fretide ger\u00e7ek veya g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fte neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7 ay\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Temel su\u00e7 tipine ili\u015fkin hareket yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen ikinci netice ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7 tipine giriyorsa, ger\u00e7ek neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7 olu\u015fur. Kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme sebebiyet verme su\u00e7u ger\u00e7ek neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7tur[1].<\/p>\n
TCK m.87\/4\u2019\u00fcn uygulanabilmesi i\u00e7in failin yaralama kast\u0131 ile hareket etmesi, ma\u011fdurun TCK m.86\/1 ve 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen \u015fekilde yaralanmas\u0131 ve failin eylemi ile ma\u011fdurun \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc aras\u0131nda illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 gereklidir[2].<\/p>\n
Belirtmeliyiz ki; kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7u (TCK m.81) ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme sebebiyet verme su\u00e7u (TCK m.87\/4) aras\u0131ndaki temel ay\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 unsur, manevi unsur, bir di\u011fer ifadeyle failin kast\u0131d\u0131r. Bu itibarla; isnat edilen fiilin hukuki nitelendirilmesinden \u00f6nce \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken esas mesele, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funun ortaya koyulmas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Nitekim doktrinde de s\u00f6ylendi\u011fi \u00fczere; kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma ile kasten yaralaman\u0131n di\u011fer \u015fekilleri, fiil tekli\u011fi halinde birle\u015febilirler. \u00d6rne\u011fin; ma\u011fduru \u00f6nce basit \u015fekilde yaralayan, ard\u0131ndan fiilini b\u0131\u00e7akla s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fcp hedef g\u00f6zetmeden b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesiyle \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne sebep olan fail, hukuki anlamda yaln\u0131zca m.87\/4 tipikli\u011fini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmi\u015f olur, yani bu h\u00fck\u00fcmden sorumlu tutulur[3].<\/p>\n
Bu kapsamda; \u00f6ncelikli olarak failin \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131yla m\u0131, yoksa yaralama kast\u0131yla m\u0131 hareket etti\u011finin de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
TCK m.21\/1 uyar\u0131nca kast, failin su\u00e7un yasal tan\u0131m\u0131ndaki unsurlar\u0131 bilerek ve isteyerek ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmesidir. Ancak manevi unsur do\u011frudan tespit edilemedi\u011finden, failin olay \u00f6ncesi, olay an\u0131 ve olay sonras\u0131ndaki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 esas al\u0131narak, objektif kriterler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu’nun yerle\u015fik kararlar\u0131nda, kast\u0131n tespitinde a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki kriterlerin dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir:<\/p>\n
– Su\u00e7un nedeni,<\/p>\n
– Kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi ve kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli,<\/p>\n
– \u0130sabet al\u0131nan v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgesi,<\/p>\n
– Darbe say\u0131s\u0131 ve \u015fiddeti,<\/p>\n
– Failin olay \u00f6ncesi ve sonras\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131,<\/p>\n
– Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki husumet,<\/p>\n
– Hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
– Ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yeri ve niteli\u011fi,<\/p>\n
– Failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi yoksa d\u0131\u015f m\u00fcdahale ile mi son verdi\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Dikkate al\u0131narak, inceleme ve de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r[4].<\/p>\n
Yeri gelmi\u015fken belirtmeliyiz ki, uygulamada olas\u0131 kast ile neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f yaralama su\u00e7unun i\u015flenebilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir[5].<\/p>\n
Kasten yaralama sonucunda \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn meydana gelmesi ile ilgili Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 30.04.2025 tarihli, 2023\/8612 E. 2025\/3476 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131: \u201cSu\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun b\u0131\u00e7akla bir tanesi \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmayan toplam iki adet b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi ile maktul\u00fc sol uyluk ve sol kal\u00e7a b\u00f6lgelerinden yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu \u015fekilde darbelerin y\u00f6neldi\u011fi v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgeleri ve nitelikleri, b\u0131\u00e7ak darbe say\u0131s\u0131, olay\u0131n olu\u015f \u015fekli ile engel bir durum bulunmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun eylemine kendili\u011finden son vermesi ve su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun elindeki b\u0131\u00e7akla olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kabul edilen maktuldeki toplam iki adet kesici delici alet yaralanmas\u0131ndan sadece birinin \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmas\u0131 ile savunman\u0131n aksine su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011fini g\u00f6steren kesin ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 kan\u0131t bulunmamas\u0131 hususlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kast yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik olup su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayininde isabetsizlik bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen sebeplerinin incelenmesinde h\u00fck\u00fcmde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle, TCK m.87\/4 uyar\u0131nca verilen cezan\u0131n onanmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bu karar; belirlenen kriterlerden yaln\u0131zca birinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya yoklu\u011fu, kast\u0131n belirlenebilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ortaya koymaktad\u0131r. Nitekim; somut olayda darbe say\u0131s\u0131 ile niteli\u011fi birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f olup, iki adet b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi bulunmakla birlikte, bunlar\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc mahiyette olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve failin kast\u0131n\u0131n tespiti hukuka uygun bir \u015fekilde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 16.01.2024 tarihli, 2022\/2914 E. ve 2024\/354 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; \u201cDosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re; san\u0131klar\u0131n maktul\u00fc kafa, g\u00f6\u011f\u00fcs ve kol b\u00f6lgelerinden aksi ispat olunamayan savunmalar\u0131na g\u00f6re 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un m.6\/1-f kapsam\u0131nda silahtan say\u0131lan herhangi bir alet kullanmadan, el marifetiyle yaralad\u0131klar\u0131, maktul\u00fcn k\u00fcnt kafa travmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 burun kemi\u011fi k\u0131r\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra darp sonucu beyin kanamas\u0131 ve geli\u015fen komplikasyonlar (menenjit) sonucu hayat\u0131n\u0131 kaybetti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lan olayda; ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu’nun 22.03.2023 tarihli, 2022\/1-571 Esas ve 2023\/173 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere; yumrukla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen maktuldeki yaralanmalar\u0131n, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesi haricinde hafif nitelik ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesindeki yaralanmalar\u0131n ise kafa kubbe ve kaide k\u0131r\u0131\u011f\u0131na yol a\u00e7mamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6l\u00fcm sonucunu do\u011furacak nitelik ve niceli\u011fe sahip olmamas\u0131, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimine g\u00f6re hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131 da oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemlerine kendili\u011finden son vererek 112 acil yard\u0131m hatt\u0131n\u0131 aramak suretiyle maktul\u00fc kurtarmaya y\u00f6nelik \u00e7aba g\u00f6stermeleri hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemlerine ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kastlar\u0131n\u0131n kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, san\u0131klar hakk\u0131nda 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un m.87\/4 birinci c\u00fcmlesi uyar\u0131nca temel ceza tayininde alt ve \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131rlar aras\u0131nda \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131ra yak\u0131n bir ceza belirlenmesi suretiyle kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 yerine, yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme sonucu kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan mahkumiyetlerine karar verilmesini\u201d hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulmu\u015ftur. Olayda; failin hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n olmas\u0131, olay sonras\u0131nda maktul\u00fc kurtarmaya y\u00f6nelik iradesi hususlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131narak, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu tespit edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Benzer \u015fekilde kast\u0131n belirlenmesinde etkili olan darbe say\u0131s\u0131, husumet yoklu\u011fu, eyleme kendili\u011finden son verme kriterlerinin sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131 olayda; san\u0131k ile ma\u011fdurun uzun s\u00fcredir arkada\u015f olduklar\u0131, olay g\u00fcn\u00fc san\u0131\u011f\u0131n evinde bulunduklar\u0131, alkol\u00fcn etkisiyle san\u0131k ile ma\u011fdurun tart\u0131\u015fmaya ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sinirlenerek eline ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 b\u0131\u00e7akla s\u0131rt\u0131na bir kez vurmak suretiyle ma\u011fduru yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye te\u015febb\u00fcs h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinden cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir[6].<\/p>\n
Yine; san\u0131k haricinde bir g\u00f6rg\u00fc tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir olayda, T\u00fcrkmenistan vatanda\u015f\u0131, kar\u0131 koca olan san\u0131k ile maktul\u00fcn T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 \u00e7iftlikte prefabrik konutta birlikte ya\u015fad\u0131klar\u0131 ve \u00e7iftin alkol kullanma al\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011fu dosya kapsam\u0131ndan anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Su\u00e7 tarihinde; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n olay\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi prefabrik konutta maktul\u00fcn v\u00fccudunun \u00e7e\u015fitli yerlerine sopa ile defalarca vurdu\u011fu, maktul\u00fcn hareketsiz kalmas\u0131 \u00fczerine bir s\u00fcre bekledikten sonra e\u015finin \u00f6ld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc s\u00f6yleyerek yard\u0131m istemesiyle olay\u0131n resmi makamlara intikal etti\u011fi olayda, \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince verilen kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7una ili\u015fkin mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc, \u201ctaraflar aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek bir husumetin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, iki e\u015f aras\u0131nda ya\u015fanan ve g\u00f6rg\u00fc tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 bulunmayan olayda san\u0131k savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n aksini g\u00f6sterir bir delile rastlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, otopsi raporuna g\u00f6re maktul\u00fcn kafatas\u0131 kubbe ve kaide kemiklerinde k\u0131r\u0131k veya \u00e7atlak bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi di\u011fer y\u00fcz kemiklerinde de herhangi bir k\u0131r\u0131k olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 derecede alkoll\u00fc olan maktul\u00fcn \u00f6l\u00fcm sebebinin yumu\u015fak doku yaralanmas\u0131 sonucu olu\u015ftu\u011fu bu nedenlerle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131yla hareket etti\u011fine dair her t\u00fcrl\u00fc \u015f\u00fcpheden uzak, kesin ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yaralama kast\u0131 i\u00e7inde hareket etti\u011finin kabul\u00fc ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7undan 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 87\/4. maddesinin ikinci c\u00fcmlesi uyar\u0131nca \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131rdan ceza tayini suretiyle h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeksizin\u201d \u015feklindeki gerek\u00e7elerle hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunarak bozulmu\u015ftur[7]. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi kast\u0131 belirlerken; taraflar ars\u0131ndaki husumet, san\u0131k savunmas\u0131, otopsi raporu ve isabet al\u0131nan v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgesi kriterlerini de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir[8].<\/p>\n
Kast\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi, yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funun belirlenmesinde tart\u0131\u015fmal\u0131 olan noktalardan bir di\u011feri de darbe say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n yorumuna ili\u015fkindir. Kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi ve hedef al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge ile darbe say\u0131s\u0131 kast\u0131n belirlenmesinde \u00f6nemli kriterlerden biri haline gelmi\u015ftir. \u0130\u00e7tihatta bir b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fck olmamakla birlikte, somut olay\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fine g\u00f6re, darbe say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n birden fazla oldu\u011fu hallerde de kast\u0131n yaralama y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin Yarg\u0131tay g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc bulunmaktad\u0131r[9].<\/p>\n
\u0130stanbul Anadolu 15. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi\u2019nin 04.07.2023 tarihli, 2022\/122 E. ve 2023\/194 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan kurulan mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn istinaf incelemesini yapan \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye 1. Ceza Dairesi taraf\u0131ndan 11.10.2023 tarihli, 2023\/1262 E. ve 2023\/1201 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile somut olay \u00fczerinde bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n ve gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6sterilmeksizin esastan reddedildi\u011fi, bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 san\u0131\u011f\u0131n lehinde ve aleyhinde temyiz ba\u015fvurusunun yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafilerinin temyiz sebeplerinden birisinin, kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme de\u011fil de kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin uygulanmamas\u0131 suretiyle su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc oldu\u011fu, ancak Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan temyiz incelemesi sonucunda 03.03.2025 tarihli, 2023\/9452 E. ve 2025\/1586 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararla temyiz istemlerinin esastan reddedildi\u011fi ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn onand\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi; herhangi bir somut de\u011ferlendirme yapmaks\u0131z\u0131n ve gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6stermeksizin, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine uyan su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru \u015fekilde belirlendi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafilerinin su\u00e7 vasf\u0131na y\u00f6nelik temyiz taleplerinin, yani su\u00e7un kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme de\u011fil de kasten insan yaralama suretiyle \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma, yani neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f yaralamaya dair bozma taleplerinin reddedildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayinin, hem san\u0131\u011f\u0131n cezas\u0131n\u0131n a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hem de infaz\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131, kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7unun cezas\u0131 ve infaz\u0131 ile kasten yaralama su\u00e7unun neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f sonucunun cezas\u0131n\u0131n ve infaz\u0131n\u0131n farkl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, bu hususlar\u0131n TCK m.81 ve m.87\/4 ile 5275 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza \u0130nfaz Kanunu m.107\u2019de ve ilgili h\u00fck\u00fcmlerde farkl\u0131 a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131klarda ve \u015fekillerde d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, hem bu bak\u0131mdan ve hem de maddi hakikat ve adalete ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan su\u00e7un vasf\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru tayin edilmesinin \u00e7ok \u00f6nemli oldu\u011fu, Ceza Hukuku y\u00f6n\u00fcnden failin kast\u0131n\u0131n ve maktulle olan husumetinin ve Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de \u201c\u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r\u201d ilkesinin g\u00f6zard\u0131 edilemeyece\u011fi, her somut olay\u0131n \u00f6zelliklerinin farkl\u0131l\u0131k arz etti\u011fi, \u00f6nemli olan\u0131n ise Ceza Hukuku ile Ceza Muhakemesi Hukukunun prensiplerinin her somut olaya do\u011fru tatbikinin sa\u011flanabilmesinin olaca\u011f\u0131, bu yolla taraf tutmaks\u0131z\u0131n adaletin sa\u011flanabilece\u011fi, her ne kadar CMK m.223\/2-e\u2019den ve m.223\/5\u2019den kaynaklanan sebeple, \u015f\u00fcphenin san\u0131k aleyhine de\u011fil, lehine de\u011ferlendirilmesi zorunlu olup, bu zorunluluk su\u00e7suzluk\/masumiyet karinesinden kaynaklansa da, bu kural\u0131n itham sisteminin zorunlu bir sonucu oldu\u011fu, bunun san\u0131\u011f\u0131n taraf\u0131n\u0131 tutmak anlam\u0131na da gelmeyece\u011fi, bu bak\u0131mdan su\u00e7a ili\u015fkin somut delillerin usule uygun toplan\u0131p de\u011ferlendirilmesinin \u00e7ok \u00f6nemli oldu\u011fu, delilleri toplaman\u0131n ve de\u011ferlendirmenin bilhassa soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131n\u0131n en \u00f6nemli meselesi oldu\u011fu, bu s\u00fcre\u00e7te CMK m.160\/2\u2019de \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen delil toplama kural\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ve yine ileride a\u00e7\u0131lacak kamu davas\u0131 s\u00fcrecini etkileyecek hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 deliller meselesine de azami \u00f6zen g\u00f6sterilmesi gerekti\u011fi, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc ba\u015fta Anayasa m.36\/6 olmak \u00fczere, CMK m.206\/2-a ve m.217\/2\u2019nin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 yol ve y\u00f6ntemlerle elde edilen delilin san\u0131k aleyhine kullan\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koydu\u011fu, kanun koyucunun hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 deliller konusunda bir ay\u0131r\u0131ma da gitmedi\u011fi, iddia edenin iddias\u0131n\u0131 hukuka uygun yol ve y\u00f6ntemlerle elde edilmi\u015f ve mahkeme huzurunda getirilmi\u015f somut delillerle kan\u0131tlamas\u0131 kural\u0131n\u0131n kabul edildi\u011fi izahtan varestedir.<\/p>\n
Bu genel a\u00e7\u0131klama ve de\u011ferlendirme \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, somut olaya ili\u015fkin \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin ve Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n kararlar\u0131 ile bu kararlarda ge\u00e7en bilgi ve belgeler su\u00e7un vasf\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelendi\u011finde;<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T. ile maktul A. aras\u0131nda \u00e7\u0131kan tart\u0131\u015fmada; T.\u2019nin \u00e7ekmecede bulunan b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131 maktul A.\u2019\u0131n baca\u011f\u0131na saplamas\u0131 sonucunda, damar yaralanmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 d\u0131\u015f kanama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcm ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Mahkemece yap\u0131lan ve kanun yollar\u0131ndan ge\u00e7en mahkumiyet karar\u0131nda, su\u00e7un vasf\u0131 kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme olarak kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Ancak san\u0131k T.\u2019nin icra etti\u011fi fiilin; doktrinin kabul\u00fc de dikkate al\u0131narak, neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme sebep olma su\u00e7unun tipikli\u011fine uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bir \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir[10].<\/p>\n
Buna g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
Kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7u ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7u aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 kriterden en \u00f6nemlisi, manevi unsur farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla; su\u00e7un vas\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken konu, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fudur.<\/p>\n
TCK m.21\/1\u2019e g\u00f6re; su\u00e7un kanuni tan\u0131m\u0131ndaki unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n bilerek ve istenerek ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi olan ve failin i\u00e7 d\u00fcnyas\u0131n\u0131 ilgilendiren kast, d\u0131\u015f d\u00fcnyaya yans\u0131yan davran\u0131\u015flara bak\u0131larak, daha a\u00e7\u0131k bir ifade ile failin olay \u00f6ncesi, olay s\u0131ras\u0131 ve olay sonras\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fc al\u0131narak belirlenmelidir. Bunun yan\u0131nda; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n olay \u00f6ncesi, s\u0131ras\u0131 ve sonras\u0131ndaki d\u0131\u015f d\u00fcnyaya yans\u0131yan hareketleri de kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralama fiiline y\u00f6nelik olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nemlidir.<\/p>\n
Failin \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile mi yoksa yaralama kast\u0131 ile mi hareket etti\u011finin tespiti noktas\u0131nda y\u00fcksek mahkemenin belirli kriterleri bulunmaktad\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 08.07.2003 g\u00fcn ve 196-212; 30.09.2003 g\u00fcn ve 226-229; 08.07.2008 g\u00fcn ve 88-184 ile 31.03.2009 g\u00fcn ve 248-82 say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda; su\u00e7 nedeni, kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi, kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli, isabet al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge, darbe adedi ve \u015fiddeti, failin su\u00e7tan \u00f6nceki ve sonraki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, aradaki husumet, hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yerleri ve nitelikleri, failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi, yoksa engel bir nedenden dolay\u0131 m\u0131 son verdi\u011fi gibi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler esas al\u0131nmak suretiyle kast\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir[11]. Buna g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
Su\u00e7ta Kullan\u0131lan Aletin Cinsi<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.\u2019nin yaralama amac\u0131yla kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131n dosyaya gelen kriminal raporuna g\u00f6re, 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Ate\u015fli Silahlar ve B\u0131\u00e7aklar ile Di\u011fer Aletler Hakk\u0131nda Kanun kapsam\u0131na giren yasak niteli\u011fini haiz b\u0131\u00e7aklardan olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
Kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015eekli<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.; kan\u0131nda uyu\u015fturucu madde bulunan maktulle \u00e7\u0131kan tart\u0131\u015fmada, \u00e7ekmecede bulunan \u00e7ak\u0131y\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve maktul\u00fcn bacak b\u00f6lgesine bir kabule g\u00f6re iki kez saplad\u0131\u011f\u0131, fakat otopsi raporunda \u00fc\u00e7 kesikten bahsedildi\u011fi, bunlardan birisinin b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131n giri\u015f \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f yerleri olabilece\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Yara Yerleri<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.\u2019nin, maktul\u00fc e\u011filerek baca\u011f\u0131ndan b\u0131\u00e7aklad\u0131\u011f\u0131, darbeleri bald\u0131r\u0131n d\u0131\u015f b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne, yani \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nahiyelerin d\u0131\u015f\u0131na vurdu\u011fu, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n vuru\u015f say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n ve b\u00f6lgesinin hayati olmay\u0131\u015f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yaralama kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131labilece\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Darbe Say\u0131s\u0131 ve \u015eiddeti<\/p>\n
Otopsi raporuna g\u00f6re; maktul\u00fcn v\u00fccudunda bacak b\u00f6lgesinde 3 kesik bulundu\u011fu, bunlardan yaln\u0131zca birinin \u00f6l\u00fcme sebebiyet verecek nitelikte oldu\u011fu, di\u011fer 2 kesi\u011fin \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kesiklerden birisinin b\u0131\u00e7ak giri\u015finin \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f yeri olarak de\u011ferlendirilebilece\u011fi, ancak her durumda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesinin en az 2 kez, yani birden fazla oldu\u011funun anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, rapora g\u00f6re yaralardan birisinin sol uyluk orta d\u0131\u015f yanda olan \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olup, di\u011fer yaralar\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, maktuldeki yara yerleri ile niteliklerinin de su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayininde \u00f6nemli oldu\u011fu, buna g\u00f6re su\u00e7un maddi ve manevi unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilece\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Failin Su\u00e7tan \u00d6nceki ve Sonraki Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.\u2019nin fiilinden hemen sonra maktule ilk yard\u0131mda bulundu\u011fu, daha sonra apartmanda bulunanlardan ambulans \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rmalar\u0131 i\u00e7in yard\u0131m istedi\u011fi, dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
Olay yerine sa\u011fl\u0131k g\u00f6revlilerinin gelmesi \u00fczerine san\u0131\u011f\u0131n olay\u0131n verdi\u011fi \u015fokla \u201c\u00f6lm\u00fc\u015f m\u00fc\u201d \u015feklinde iki kez sordu\u011fu, ancak cevap alamay\u0131nca i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu psikolojik durum ve travman\u0131n etkisinin olu\u015fturdu\u011fu anl\u0131k k\u0131zg\u0131nl\u0131kla \u201c\u00f6lmediyse bir kez daha saplayay\u0131m\u201d \u015feklinde bir ifadesinin oldu\u011fu, ancak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcm olay\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftikten sonra kendili\u011finden yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n[12], san\u0131\u011f\u0131n usule uygun al\u0131nan beyan\u0131 ve savunmas\u0131 olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi, <\/p>\n
Husumet<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T. ile ve maktul A.\u2019n\u0131n tan\u0131\u015f\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n 5 ila 6 y\u0131l oldu\u011fu, dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re taraflar aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek bir husumetin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
Failin Fiili Kendili\u011finden mi, Yoksa Engel Bir Nedenden Dolay\u0131 m\u0131 Son Verdi\u011fi<\/p>\n
San\u0131\u011f\u0131n, fiili icray\u0131 durdurmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek zorlay\u0131c\u0131 bir neden bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n kendili\u011finden son verdi\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n konuyla ilgili ortaya koydu\u011fu kriterler somut olaya uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n ve fiilinin \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye de\u011fil, yaralamaya d\u00f6n\u00fck oldu\u011fu, bu nedenle san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan verilen mahkumiyet karar\u0131n\u0131n hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ceza muhakemesinin en \u00f6nemli ilkelerinden olan \u201c\u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r\u201d ilkesi uyar\u0131nca; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bir su\u00e7tan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n temel \u015fart\u0131, su\u00e7un \u015f\u00fcpheye yer b\u0131rakmayacak bir \u015fekilde ispatlanmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Olduk\u00e7a geni\u015f bir uygulama alan\u0131 bulan bu ilke; bir su\u00e7un ger\u00e7ekten i\u015flenip i\u015flenmedi\u011fi veya su\u00e7 niteli\u011finin belirlenmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan uygulanaca\u011f\u0131 gibi, eylemin ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi konusunda \u015f\u00fcphe bulunmas\u0131 halinde de uygulanacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Buna g\u00f6re; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n arkada\u015f\u0131 olan maktul\u00fc \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek herhangi bir sebebin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu konuda san\u0131k aleyhine \u015f\u00fcphenin yenilmedi\u011fi, kullan\u0131lan vas\u0131tan\u0131n niteli\u011fi, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye d\u00f6n\u00fck oldu\u011funda \u015f\u00fcphenin a\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131 ve \u015f\u00fcphenin de san\u0131k lehine de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye y\u00f6nelik kast\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7undan 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK m.87\/4 uyar\u0131nca h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi halde, s\u0131rf san\u0131\u011f\u0131n maktul\u00fcn \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnden sonra k\u0131zg\u0131nl\u0131kla veya \u015fuursuzca s\u00f6yledi\u011fi s\u00f6zlerin \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koymayaca\u011f\u0131, b\u0131\u00e7akl\u0131 darbe say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n birden fazla olmas\u0131n\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koymayaca\u011f\u0131, burada maktuldeki yara yerlerinin \u00f6nemli olmas\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131nda, san\u0131k ile maktul aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek husumetin bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n fiiline devam etmeyip fiilini kendili\u011finden sonland\u0131rmas\u0131n\u0131n da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmelidir.<\/p>\n
Nitekim bu yaz\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n 6 numaral\u0131 dipnotunda yer verdi\u011fimiz yer verdi\u011fimiz emsal nitelik ta\u015f\u0131yan Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 09.04.2025 tarih, 2023\/6389 E., 2025\/2705 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; \u201cSan\u0131\u011f\u0131n, kat\u0131lan\u0131 tek b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi ile yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k ile kat\u0131lan aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek d\u00fczeyde husumet bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine devam etmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir beyan\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ciddi bir engel hal olmadan kat\u0131lan\u0131n yaralanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine eylemine kendili\u011finden son verdi\u011fi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011finin \u015f\u00fcpheli kald\u0131\u011f\u0131, kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu, temel cezada alt s\u0131n\u0131rdan uzakla\u015f\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmesinin\u201d hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 kabul edildi\u011fi ve mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozuldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n
III. Sonu\u00e7<\/p>\n
Kast\u0131n belirlenmesinde; su\u00e7 nedeni, kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi, kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli, isabet al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge, darbe adedi ve \u015fiddeti, failin su\u00e7tan \u00f6nceki ve sonraki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, aradaki husumet, hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yerleri ve nitelikleri, failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi, yoksa engel bir nedenden dolay\u0131 m\u0131 son verdi\u011fi gibi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerin esas al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ile belirlenmi\u015ftir. Failin kast\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011funu belirlerken, en \u00f6nemli husus fiili ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi andaki kast\u0131d\u0131r. Bu sebeple, o andaki kast\u0131 tespit etmek i\u00e7in belirlenen kriterler somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131 ile bir b\u00fct\u00fcn i\u00e7inde de\u011ferlendirilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Son olarak; \u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r ilkesine g\u00f6re, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bir su\u00e7tan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n temel \u015fart\u0131, su\u00e7un \u015f\u00fcpheye yer vermeyen bir kesinlikle ispat edilmesine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesinde \u015f\u00fcphe olmas\u0131 halinde, \u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r ilkesi gere\u011fince kast\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu kabul edilmeli ve TCK m.87\/4 uygulanmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Prof. Dr. Ersan \u015een<\/p>\n
Av. Mert Mavi\u015f<\/p>\n
Stj. Av. Ece Efeo\u011flu<\/p>\n
(Bu makale, say\u0131n Prof. Dr. Ersan \u015eEN taraf\u0131ndan www.hukukihaber.net sitesinde yay\u0131nlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in kaleme al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Kaynak g\u00f6sterilse dahi makalenin tamam\u0131 \u00f6zel izin al\u0131nmadan kullan\u0131lamaz. Ancak al\u0131nt\u0131lanan makalenin bir b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc, aktif link verilerek kullan\u0131labilir. Yazar\u0131 ve kayna\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6sterilmeden k\u0131smen ya da tamamen yay\u0131nlanmas\u0131 \u015fahsi haklara ve fikri haklara ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil eder.)<\/p>\n
——————-<\/p>\n
[1] Mahmut Koca, \u0130lhan \u00dcz\u00fclmez, T\u00fcrk Ceza Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 14. Bask\u0131, Se\u00e7kin Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara, 2021, s. 246.<\/p>\n
[2] Hasan Tahsin G\u00f6kcan, Mustafa Artu\u00e7, Yorumlu-Uygulamal\u0131 T\u00fcrk Ceza Kanunu \u015eerhi, 3. Cilt, Adalet Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara, 2021, s.3363-3367.<\/p>\n
[3] Mahmut Koca, \u0130lhan \u00dcz\u00fclmez, \u201cKasten Yaralama Sonucu \u00d6l\u00fcme Neden Olma (TCK m.87\/4)\u201d, \u0130stanbul \u00dcniversitesi Hukuk Fak\u00fcltesi Mecmuas\u0131 Cilt: 71, Say\u0131: 1, 2013, s. 814.<\/p>\n
[4] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 08.07.2003 g\u00fcn ve 196-212; 30.09.2003 g\u00fcn ve 226-229; 08.07.2008 g\u00fcn ve 88-184 ile 31.03.2009 g\u00fcn ve 248-82 K., 13.02.2018 g\u00fcn ve 2017\/1-1029 E., 2018\/38 K.<\/p>\n
[5] Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 10.06.2021, 2020\/165 E. ve 2021\/273 K.<\/p>\n
[6] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 09.04.2025 tarih, 2023\/6389 E., 2025\/2705 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; \u201cSan\u0131\u011f\u0131n, kat\u0131lan\u0131 tek b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi ile yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k ile kat\u0131lan aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek d\u00fczeyde husumet bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine devam etmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir beyan\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ciddi bir engel hal olmadan kat\u0131lan\u0131n yaralanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine eylemine kendili\u011finden son verdi\u011fi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011finin \u015f\u00fcpheli kald\u0131\u011f\u0131, kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu, temel cezada alt s\u0131n\u0131rdan uzakla\u015f\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmesinin\u201d hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 22.03.2023 tarihli, 2022\/571 E., 2023\/173 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; \u201cSan\u0131k savunmas\u0131 ve kat\u0131lan beyanlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, taraflar\u0131n dedelerinden miras kalan arsadan kaynaklanan ihtilaf\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek derecede bir husumet boyutunda bulunmamas\u0131, bu hususun, maktul\u00fcn kendisiyle ayn\u0131 araca binmeyi ve birlikte alkol almay\u0131 kabul etti\u011fine ili\u015fkin aksi kan\u0131tlanamayan san\u0131k savunmas\u0131yla \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fmesi, k\u00fct bir cisim ve yumrukla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen maktuldeki yaralanmalar\u0131n, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesi haricinde, hafif nitelik ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesindeki yaralanmalar\u0131n ise kafa kubbe ve kaide k\u0131r\u0131\u011f\u0131na yol a\u00e7mamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6l\u00fcm sonucunu do\u011furacak nitelik ve niceli\u011fe sahip olmamas\u0131, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimine g\u00f6re hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131 da oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine kendili\u011finden son vererek tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na g\u00f6re maktul\u00fc hastaneye g\u00f6t\u00fcrmek suretiyle maktul\u00fc kurtarmaya y\u00f6nelik \u00e7aba g\u00f6stermesi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kast\u0131n\u0131n kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu\u201d kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
[7] Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 06.02.2025 tarihli, 2023\/6689 E., 2025\/837 K.<\/p>\n
[8] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 09.06.2011 tarih, 2011\/416 E. ve 2011\/3742 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131. Kararda; \u201c(\u2026)san\u0131\u011f\u0131n geri \u00e7ekilerek yak\u0131n mesafeden maktul\u00fcn sol baca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 hedef alarak iki el ate\u015f etti\u011fi, engel olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde eylemini s\u00fcrd\u00fcrmeyip ka\u00e7\u0131p gitti\u011fi, maktul\u00fcn sol femur ve sol tibia b\u00f6lgelerinden giri\u015f \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f yapan mermi isabetleriyle yaraland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve sol femur b\u00f6lgesinde damar delinmesine ba\u011fl\u0131 d\u0131\u015f kanama sonucu \u00f6ld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc olayda, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralama olarak vas\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131larak 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK\u2019n\u0131n 87\/4. maddesi uyar\u0131nca cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrmek su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle fazla ceza tayini(\u2026)\u201d bozma gerek\u00e7esi yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
[9] Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 20.11.2017 tarihli, 2017\/2609 E., 2017\/4050 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131na g\u00f6re: \u201cSan\u0131klar ve maktul\u00fcn aralar\u0131ndaki alacak verecek meselesini konu\u015fmak i\u00e7in bulu\u015ftuklar\u0131nda aralar\u0131nda \u00e7\u0131kan tart\u0131\u015fma s\u0131ras\u0131nda san\u0131k …’un maktule yumruk ve tekme ile vurarak yere d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrmesinden sonra san\u0131k …’un 3 b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesiyle maktul\u00fc sa\u011f uyluk ve sol uyluk b\u00f6lgelerinden yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kesilerden bir tanesinin popliteal arter ve ven kesilerine neden olmas\u0131 nedeniyle maktul\u00fcn i\u00e7 ve d\u0131\u015f kan kayb\u0131 ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 geli\u015fen komplikasyonlar sonucu hayat\u0131n\u0131 kaybetti\u011fi olayda, Darbelerin y\u00f6neltildi\u011fi v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgeleri ve nitelikleri ile engel bir durum bulunmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemlerine kendiliklerinden son vermeleri dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, eylemlerinin kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu ve haklar\u0131nda 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 37\/1. maddesi delaletiyle 87\/4. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeksizin, su\u00e7 niteli\u011finde yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131\u201d bozma sebebi olarak de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
[10] \u201cKasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma ile kasten yaralaman\u0131n di\u011fer \u015fekilleri fiil tekli\u011fi halinde birle\u015febilirler. \u00d6rne\u011fin \u00f6nce kasten yaralaman\u0131n temel \u015feklini i\u015flemek i\u00e7in ma\u011fdura sald\u0131ran (m. 86\/1), daha sonra sald\u0131r\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 b\u0131\u00e7akla s\u00fcrd\u00fcren (m. 86\/3), baca\u011f\u0131na saplanan b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131n ana damar\u0131 kesmesi nedeniyle ma\u011fdurun bitkisel hayata girmesine (m. 87\/2) ve daha sonra da \u00f6lmesine (m. 87\/4) neden olan ki\u015fi, hukuki anlamda yaln\u0131zca 87\/4. maddenin tipikli\u011fini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmi\u015f olur.\u201d Mahmut Koca, \u0130lhan \u00dcz\u00fclmez, \u201cKasten Yaralama Sonucu \u00d6l\u00fcme Neden Olma (TCK m.87\/4)\u201d, \u0130stanbul \u00dcniversitesi Hukuk Fak\u00fcltesi Mecmuas\u0131 C\u0130lt:71, Say\u0131: 1, 2013, s. 814.<\/p>\n
[11] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu 13.02.2018 g\u00fcn ve 2017\/1-1029 E., 2018\/38 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131na g\u00f6re; \u201cSu\u00e7 nedeni, su\u00e7ta kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi, kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli, isabet al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge, darbe adedi ve \u015fiddeti, failin su\u00e7tan \u00f6nceki ve sonraki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, aradaki husumet, hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yerleri ve nitelikleri, failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi, yoksa engel bir nedenden dolay\u0131 m\u0131 son verdi\u011fi gibi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler esas al\u0131nmak suretiyle kast\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmektedir.\u201d Ersin \u015eare, \u201cY\u00fcksek Mahkeme Kararlar\u0131nda Kasten Yaralama Sonucu \u00d6l\u00fcme Neden Olma Su\u00e7u (TCK m. 87\/4)\u201d, Dicle \u00dcniversitesi Hukuk Fak\u00fcltesi Dergisi, Cilt:25, Say\u0131: 43, 2020, s. 300-301.<\/p>\n
[12] Bkz. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu, 22.12.2022 tarihli ve 2022\/388 E., 2022\/824 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131.<\/p>\n
\u200bI. Giri\u015f<\/p>\n
Yaralama fiilinin \u00f6l\u00fcmle neticelendi\u011fi durumlarda su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayini, yani fiilin neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f yaralama (TCK m.87\/4) su\u00e7u mu, yoksa insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme (TCK m.81) su\u00e7u kapsam\u0131nda m\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi, bu su\u00e7lar i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen cezalar dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan fail i\u00e7in hayatidir. \u00d6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi, \u00f6zellikle neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f kasten yaralama ile kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131mda b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle, kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7u ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7u aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 kriterden en \u00f6nemlisi manevi unsur farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla; su\u00e7un vas\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken konu, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi, yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkindir. Bu yaz\u0131m\u0131zda; ay\u0131r\u0131ma esas te\u015fkil eden \u201c\u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131n\u201d varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti i\u00e7in dikkate al\u0131nan \u015fartlara\/kriterlere ve konu ile ilgili hukuki de\u011ferlendirmelere yer verece\u011fiz.<\/p>\n
II. Geli\u015fme<\/p>\n
Farkl\u0131 sonu\u00e7lara yol a\u00e7mas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6\u011fretide ger\u00e7ek veya g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fte neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7 ay\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Temel su\u00e7 tipine ili\u015fkin hareket yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen ikinci netice ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7 tipine giriyorsa, ger\u00e7ek neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7 olu\u015fur. Kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme sebebiyet verme su\u00e7u ger\u00e7ek neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7tur[1].<\/p>\n
TCK m.87\/4\u2019\u00fcn uygulanabilmesi i\u00e7in failin yaralama kast\u0131 ile hareket etmesi, ma\u011fdurun TCK m.86\/1 ve 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen \u015fekilde yaralanmas\u0131 ve failin eylemi ile ma\u011fdurun \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc aras\u0131nda illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 gereklidir[2].<\/p>\n
Belirtmeliyiz ki; kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7u (TCK m.81) ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme sebebiyet verme su\u00e7u (TCK m.87\/4) aras\u0131ndaki temel ay\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 unsur, manevi unsur, bir di\u011fer ifadeyle failin kast\u0131d\u0131r. Bu itibarla; isnat edilen fiilin hukuki nitelendirilmesinden \u00f6nce \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken esas mesele, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funun ortaya koyulmas\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Nitekim doktrinde de s\u00f6ylendi\u011fi \u00fczere; kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma ile kasten yaralaman\u0131n di\u011fer \u015fekilleri, fiil tekli\u011fi halinde birle\u015febilirler. \u00d6rne\u011fin; ma\u011fduru \u00f6nce basit \u015fekilde yaralayan, ard\u0131ndan fiilini b\u0131\u00e7akla s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fcp hedef g\u00f6zetmeden b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesiyle \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne sebep olan fail, hukuki anlamda yaln\u0131zca m.87\/4 tipikli\u011fini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmi\u015f olur, yani bu h\u00fck\u00fcmden sorumlu tutulur[3].<\/p>\n
Bu kapsamda; \u00f6ncelikli olarak failin \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131yla m\u0131, yoksa yaralama kast\u0131yla m\u0131 hareket etti\u011finin de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
TCK m.21\/1 uyar\u0131nca kast, failin su\u00e7un yasal tan\u0131m\u0131ndaki unsurlar\u0131 bilerek ve isteyerek ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmesidir. Ancak manevi unsur do\u011frudan tespit edilemedi\u011finden, failin olay \u00f6ncesi, olay an\u0131 ve olay sonras\u0131ndaki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 esas al\u0131narak, objektif kriterler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu’nun yerle\u015fik kararlar\u0131nda, kast\u0131n tespitinde a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki kriterlerin dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir:<\/p>\n
– Su\u00e7un nedeni,<\/p>\n
– Kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi ve kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli,<\/p>\n
– \u0130sabet al\u0131nan v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgesi,<\/p>\n
– Darbe say\u0131s\u0131 ve \u015fiddeti,<\/p>\n
– Failin olay \u00f6ncesi ve sonras\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131,<\/p>\n
– Taraflar aras\u0131ndaki husumet,<\/p>\n
– Hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
– Ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yeri ve niteli\u011fi,<\/p>\n
– Failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi yoksa d\u0131\u015f m\u00fcdahale ile mi son verdi\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Dikkate al\u0131narak, inceleme ve de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r[4].<\/p>\n
Yeri gelmi\u015fken belirtmeliyiz ki, uygulamada olas\u0131 kast ile neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f yaralama su\u00e7unun i\u015flenebilece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir[5].<\/p>\n
Kasten yaralama sonucunda \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn meydana gelmesi ile ilgili Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 30.04.2025 tarihli, 2023\/8612 E. 2025\/3476 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131: \u201cSu\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun b\u0131\u00e7akla bir tanesi \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmayan toplam iki adet b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi ile maktul\u00fc sol uyluk ve sol kal\u00e7a b\u00f6lgelerinden yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu \u015fekilde darbelerin y\u00f6neldi\u011fi v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgeleri ve nitelikleri, b\u0131\u00e7ak darbe say\u0131s\u0131, olay\u0131n olu\u015f \u015fekli ile engel bir durum bulunmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun eylemine kendili\u011finden son vermesi ve su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun elindeki b\u0131\u00e7akla olu\u015fturdu\u011fu kabul edilen maktuldeki toplam iki adet kesici delici alet yaralanmas\u0131ndan sadece birinin \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmas\u0131 ile savunman\u0131n aksine su\u00e7a s\u00fcr\u00fcklenen \u00e7ocu\u011fun \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011fini g\u00f6steren kesin ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 kan\u0131t bulunmamas\u0131 hususlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kast yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik olup su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayininde isabetsizlik bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen sebeplerinin incelenmesinde h\u00fck\u00fcmde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle, TCK m.87\/4 uyar\u0131nca verilen cezan\u0131n onanmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bu karar; belirlenen kriterlerden yaln\u0131zca birinin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya yoklu\u011fu, kast\u0131n belirlenebilmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a ortaya koymaktad\u0131r. Nitekim; somut olayda darbe say\u0131s\u0131 ile niteli\u011fi birlikte de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015f olup, iki adet b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi bulunmakla birlikte, bunlar\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc mahiyette olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve failin kast\u0131n\u0131n tespiti hukuka uygun bir \u015fekilde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 16.01.2024 tarihli, 2022\/2914 E. ve 2024\/354 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; \u201cDosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re; san\u0131klar\u0131n maktul\u00fc kafa, g\u00f6\u011f\u00fcs ve kol b\u00f6lgelerinden aksi ispat olunamayan savunmalar\u0131na g\u00f6re 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un m.6\/1-f kapsam\u0131nda silahtan say\u0131lan herhangi bir alet kullanmadan, el marifetiyle yaralad\u0131klar\u0131, maktul\u00fcn k\u00fcnt kafa travmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 burun kemi\u011fi k\u0131r\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra darp sonucu beyin kanamas\u0131 ve geli\u015fen komplikasyonlar (menenjit) sonucu hayat\u0131n\u0131 kaybetti\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lan olayda; ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu’nun 22.03.2023 tarihli, 2022\/1-571 Esas ve 2023\/173 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere; yumrukla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen maktuldeki yaralanmalar\u0131n, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesi haricinde hafif nitelik ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesindeki yaralanmalar\u0131n ise kafa kubbe ve kaide k\u0131r\u0131\u011f\u0131na yol a\u00e7mamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6l\u00fcm sonucunu do\u011furacak nitelik ve niceli\u011fe sahip olmamas\u0131, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimine g\u00f6re hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131 da oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemlerine kendili\u011finden son vererek 112 acil yard\u0131m hatt\u0131n\u0131 aramak suretiyle maktul\u00fc kurtarmaya y\u00f6nelik \u00e7aba g\u00f6stermeleri hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemlerine ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kastlar\u0131n\u0131n kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, san\u0131klar hakk\u0131nda 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un m.87\/4 birinci c\u00fcmlesi uyar\u0131nca temel ceza tayininde alt ve \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131rlar aras\u0131nda \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131ra yak\u0131n bir ceza belirlenmesi suretiyle kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 yerine, yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda yan\u0131lg\u0131l\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme sonucu kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan mahkumiyetlerine karar verilmesini\u201d hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulmu\u015ftur. Olayda; failin hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n olmas\u0131, olay sonras\u0131nda maktul\u00fc kurtarmaya y\u00f6nelik iradesi hususlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131narak, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu tespit edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Benzer \u015fekilde kast\u0131n belirlenmesinde etkili olan darbe say\u0131s\u0131, husumet yoklu\u011fu, eyleme kendili\u011finden son verme kriterlerinin sa\u011fland\u0131\u011f\u0131 olayda; san\u0131k ile ma\u011fdurun uzun s\u00fcredir arkada\u015f olduklar\u0131, olay g\u00fcn\u00fc san\u0131\u011f\u0131n evinde bulunduklar\u0131, alkol\u00fcn etkisiyle san\u0131k ile ma\u011fdurun tart\u0131\u015fmaya ba\u015flad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n sinirlenerek eline ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 b\u0131\u00e7akla s\u0131rt\u0131na bir kez vurmak suretiyle ma\u011fduru yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye te\u015febb\u00fcs h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinden cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir[6].<\/p>\n
Yine; san\u0131k haricinde bir g\u00f6rg\u00fc tan\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir olayda, T\u00fcrkmenistan vatanda\u015f\u0131, kar\u0131 koca olan san\u0131k ile maktul\u00fcn T\u00fcrkiye\u2019de \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131klar\u0131 \u00e7iftlikte prefabrik konutta birlikte ya\u015fad\u0131klar\u0131 ve \u00e7iftin alkol kullanma al\u0131\u015fkanl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011fu dosya kapsam\u0131ndan anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Su\u00e7 tarihinde; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n olay\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi prefabrik konutta maktul\u00fcn v\u00fccudunun \u00e7e\u015fitli yerlerine sopa ile defalarca vurdu\u011fu, maktul\u00fcn hareketsiz kalmas\u0131 \u00fczerine bir s\u00fcre bekledikten sonra e\u015finin \u00f6ld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc s\u00f6yleyerek yard\u0131m istemesiyle olay\u0131n resmi makamlara intikal etti\u011fi olayda, \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince verilen kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7una ili\u015fkin mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc, \u201ctaraflar aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek bir husumetin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, iki e\u015f aras\u0131nda ya\u015fanan ve g\u00f6rg\u00fc tan\u0131\u011f\u0131 bulunmayan olayda san\u0131k savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n aksini g\u00f6sterir bir delile rastlanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, otopsi raporuna g\u00f6re maktul\u00fcn kafatas\u0131 kubbe ve kaide kemiklerinde k\u0131r\u0131k veya \u00e7atlak bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi di\u011fer y\u00fcz kemiklerinde de herhangi bir k\u0131r\u0131k olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, a\u015f\u0131r\u0131 derecede alkoll\u00fc olan maktul\u00fcn \u00f6l\u00fcm sebebinin yumu\u015fak doku yaralanmas\u0131 sonucu olu\u015ftu\u011fu bu nedenlerle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131yla hareket etti\u011fine dair her t\u00fcrl\u00fc \u015f\u00fcpheden uzak, kesin ve inand\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 delil bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yaralama kast\u0131 i\u00e7inde hareket etti\u011finin kabul\u00fc ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7undan 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 87\/4. maddesinin ikinci c\u00fcmlesi uyar\u0131nca \u00fcst s\u0131n\u0131rdan ceza tayini suretiyle h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeksizin\u201d \u015feklindeki gerek\u00e7elerle hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunarak bozulmu\u015ftur[7]. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi kast\u0131 belirlerken; taraflar ars\u0131ndaki husumet, san\u0131k savunmas\u0131, otopsi raporu ve isabet al\u0131nan v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgesi kriterlerini de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir[8].<\/p>\n
Kast\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi, yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funun belirlenmesinde tart\u0131\u015fmal\u0131 olan noktalardan bir di\u011feri de darbe say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n yorumuna ili\u015fkindir. Kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi ve hedef al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge ile darbe say\u0131s\u0131 kast\u0131n belirlenmesinde \u00f6nemli kriterlerden biri haline gelmi\u015ftir. \u0130\u00e7tihatta bir b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fck olmamakla birlikte, somut olay\u0131n \u00f6zelli\u011fine g\u00f6re, darbe say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n birden fazla oldu\u011fu hallerde de kast\u0131n yaralama y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin Yarg\u0131tay g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc bulunmaktad\u0131r[9].<\/p>\n
\u0130stanbul Anadolu 15. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi\u2019nin 04.07.2023 tarihli, 2022\/122 E. ve 2023\/194 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan kurulan mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn istinaf incelemesini yapan \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye 1. Ceza Dairesi taraf\u0131ndan 11.10.2023 tarihli, 2023\/1262 E. ve 2023\/1201 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 ile somut olay \u00fczerinde bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmaks\u0131z\u0131n ve gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6sterilmeksizin esastan reddedildi\u011fi, bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 san\u0131\u011f\u0131n lehinde ve aleyhinde temyiz ba\u015fvurusunun yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafilerinin temyiz sebeplerinden birisinin, kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme de\u011fil de kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin uygulanmamas\u0131 suretiyle su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda hataya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc oldu\u011fu, ancak Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan temyiz incelemesi sonucunda 03.03.2025 tarihli, 2023\/9452 E. ve 2025\/1586 K. say\u0131l\u0131 kararla temyiz istemlerinin esastan reddedildi\u011fi ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn onand\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi; herhangi bir somut de\u011ferlendirme yapmaks\u0131z\u0131n ve gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6stermeksizin, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine uyan su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru \u015fekilde belirlendi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle, san\u0131k m\u00fcdafilerinin su\u00e7 vasf\u0131na y\u00f6nelik temyiz taleplerinin, yani su\u00e7un kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme de\u011fil de kasten insan yaralama suretiyle \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma, yani neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f yaralamaya dair bozma taleplerinin reddedildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayinin, hem san\u0131\u011f\u0131n cezas\u0131n\u0131n a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hem de infaz\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131, kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7unun cezas\u0131 ve infaz\u0131 ile kasten yaralama su\u00e7unun neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f sonucunun cezas\u0131n\u0131n ve infaz\u0131n\u0131n farkl\u0131 oldu\u011fu, bu hususlar\u0131n TCK m.81 ve m.87\/4 ile 5275 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza \u0130nfaz Kanunu m.107\u2019de ve ilgili h\u00fck\u00fcmlerde farkl\u0131 a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131klarda ve \u015fekillerde d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, hem bu bak\u0131mdan ve hem de maddi hakikat ve adalete ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan su\u00e7un vasf\u0131n\u0131n do\u011fru tayin edilmesinin \u00e7ok \u00f6nemli oldu\u011fu, Ceza Hukuku y\u00f6n\u00fcnden failin kast\u0131n\u0131n ve maktulle olan husumetinin ve Ceza Muhakemesi Hukuku y\u00f6n\u00fcnden de \u201c\u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r\u201d ilkesinin g\u00f6zard\u0131 edilemeyece\u011fi, her somut olay\u0131n \u00f6zelliklerinin farkl\u0131l\u0131k arz etti\u011fi, \u00f6nemli olan\u0131n ise Ceza Hukuku ile Ceza Muhakemesi Hukukunun prensiplerinin her somut olaya do\u011fru tatbikinin sa\u011flanabilmesinin olaca\u011f\u0131, bu yolla taraf tutmaks\u0131z\u0131n adaletin sa\u011flanabilece\u011fi, her ne kadar CMK m.223\/2-e\u2019den ve m.223\/5\u2019den kaynaklanan sebeple, \u015f\u00fcphenin san\u0131k aleyhine de\u011fil, lehine de\u011ferlendirilmesi zorunlu olup, bu zorunluluk su\u00e7suzluk\/masumiyet karinesinden kaynaklansa da, bu kural\u0131n itham sisteminin zorunlu bir sonucu oldu\u011fu, bunun san\u0131\u011f\u0131n taraf\u0131n\u0131 tutmak anlam\u0131na da gelmeyece\u011fi, bu bak\u0131mdan su\u00e7a ili\u015fkin somut delillerin usule uygun toplan\u0131p de\u011ferlendirilmesinin \u00e7ok \u00f6nemli oldu\u011fu, delilleri toplaman\u0131n ve de\u011ferlendirmenin bilhassa soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131n\u0131n en \u00f6nemli meselesi oldu\u011fu, bu s\u00fcre\u00e7te CMK m.160\/2\u2019de \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen delil toplama kural\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ve yine ileride a\u00e7\u0131lacak kamu davas\u0131 s\u00fcrecini etkileyecek hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 deliller meselesine de azami \u00f6zen g\u00f6sterilmesi gerekti\u011fi, \u00e7\u00fcnk\u00fc ba\u015fta Anayasa m.36\/6 olmak \u00fczere, CMK m.206\/2-a ve m.217\/2\u2019nin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 yol ve y\u00f6ntemlerle elde edilen delilin san\u0131k aleyhine kullan\u0131lamayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koydu\u011fu, kanun koyucunun hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 deliller konusunda bir ay\u0131r\u0131ma da gitmedi\u011fi, iddia edenin iddias\u0131n\u0131 hukuka uygun yol ve y\u00f6ntemlerle elde edilmi\u015f ve mahkeme huzurunda getirilmi\u015f somut delillerle kan\u0131tlamas\u0131 kural\u0131n\u0131n kabul edildi\u011fi izahtan varestedir.<\/p>\n
Bu genel a\u00e7\u0131klama ve de\u011ferlendirme \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, somut olaya ili\u015fkin \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesinin, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin ve Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n kararlar\u0131 ile bu kararlarda ge\u00e7en bilgi ve belgeler su\u00e7un vasf\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelendi\u011finde;<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T. ile maktul A. aras\u0131nda \u00e7\u0131kan tart\u0131\u015fmada; T.\u2019nin \u00e7ekmecede bulunan b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131 maktul A.\u2019\u0131n baca\u011f\u0131na saplamas\u0131 sonucunda, damar yaralanmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 d\u0131\u015f kanama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcm ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Mahkemece yap\u0131lan ve kanun yollar\u0131ndan ge\u00e7en mahkumiyet karar\u0131nda, su\u00e7un vasf\u0131 kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme olarak kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Ancak san\u0131k T.\u2019nin icra etti\u011fi fiilin; doktrinin kabul\u00fc de dikkate al\u0131narak, neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme sebep olma su\u00e7unun tipikli\u011fine uygun olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 bir \u015fekilde de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir[10].<\/p>\n
Buna g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
Kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7u ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7u aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 kriterden en \u00f6nemlisi, manevi unsur farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla; su\u00e7un vas\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken konu, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fudur.<\/p>\n
TCK m.21\/1\u2019e g\u00f6re; su\u00e7un kanuni tan\u0131m\u0131ndaki unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n bilerek ve istenerek ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi olan ve failin i\u00e7 d\u00fcnyas\u0131n\u0131 ilgilendiren kast, d\u0131\u015f d\u00fcnyaya yans\u0131yan davran\u0131\u015flara bak\u0131larak, daha a\u00e7\u0131k bir ifade ile failin olay \u00f6ncesi, olay s\u0131ras\u0131 ve olay sonras\u0131 davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fc al\u0131narak belirlenmelidir. Bunun yan\u0131nda; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n olay \u00f6ncesi, s\u0131ras\u0131 ve sonras\u0131ndaki d\u0131\u015f d\u00fcnyaya yans\u0131yan hareketleri de kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralama fiiline y\u00f6nelik olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6nemlidir.<\/p>\n
Failin \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile mi yoksa yaralama kast\u0131 ile mi hareket etti\u011finin tespiti noktas\u0131nda y\u00fcksek mahkemenin belirli kriterleri bulunmaktad\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 08.07.2003 g\u00fcn ve 196-212; 30.09.2003 g\u00fcn ve 226-229; 08.07.2008 g\u00fcn ve 88-184 ile 31.03.2009 g\u00fcn ve 248-82 say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131nda; su\u00e7 nedeni, kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi, kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli, isabet al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge, darbe adedi ve \u015fiddeti, failin su\u00e7tan \u00f6nceki ve sonraki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, aradaki husumet, hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yerleri ve nitelikleri, failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi, yoksa engel bir nedenden dolay\u0131 m\u0131 son verdi\u011fi gibi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler esas al\u0131nmak suretiyle kast\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir[11]. Buna g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
Su\u00e7ta Kullan\u0131lan Aletin Cinsi<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.\u2019nin yaralama amac\u0131yla kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131n dosyaya gelen kriminal raporuna g\u00f6re, 6136 say\u0131l\u0131 Ate\u015fli Silahlar ve B\u0131\u00e7aklar ile Di\u011fer Aletler Hakk\u0131nda Kanun kapsam\u0131na giren yasak niteli\u011fini haiz b\u0131\u00e7aklardan olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
Kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015eekli<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.; kan\u0131nda uyu\u015fturucu madde bulunan maktulle \u00e7\u0131kan tart\u0131\u015fmada, \u00e7ekmecede bulunan \u00e7ak\u0131y\u0131 ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve maktul\u00fcn bacak b\u00f6lgesine bir kabule g\u00f6re iki kez saplad\u0131\u011f\u0131, fakat otopsi raporunda \u00fc\u00e7 kesikten bahsedildi\u011fi, bunlardan birisinin b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131n giri\u015f \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f yerleri olabilece\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Yara Yerleri<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.\u2019nin, maktul\u00fc e\u011filerek baca\u011f\u0131ndan b\u0131\u00e7aklad\u0131\u011f\u0131, darbeleri bald\u0131r\u0131n d\u0131\u015f b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne, yani \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nahiyelerin d\u0131\u015f\u0131na vurdu\u011fu, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n vuru\u015f say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n ve b\u00f6lgesinin hayati olmay\u0131\u015f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yaralama kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131labilece\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Darbe Say\u0131s\u0131 ve \u015eiddeti<\/p>\n
Otopsi raporuna g\u00f6re; maktul\u00fcn v\u00fccudunda bacak b\u00f6lgesinde 3 kesik bulundu\u011fu, bunlardan yaln\u0131zca birinin \u00f6l\u00fcme sebebiyet verecek nitelikte oldu\u011fu, di\u011fer 2 kesi\u011fin \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kesiklerden birisinin b\u0131\u00e7ak giri\u015finin \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f yeri olarak de\u011ferlendirilebilece\u011fi, ancak her durumda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesinin en az 2 kez, yani birden fazla oldu\u011funun anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, rapora g\u00f6re yaralardan birisinin sol uyluk orta d\u0131\u015f yanda olan \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olup, di\u011fer yaralar\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc nitelikte olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, maktuldeki yara yerleri ile niteliklerinin de su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayininde \u00f6nemli oldu\u011fu, buna g\u00f6re su\u00e7un maddi ve manevi unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilece\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Failin Su\u00e7tan \u00d6nceki ve Sonraki Davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T.\u2019nin fiilinden hemen sonra maktule ilk yard\u0131mda bulundu\u011fu, daha sonra apartmanda bulunanlardan ambulans \u00e7a\u011f\u0131rmalar\u0131 i\u00e7in yard\u0131m istedi\u011fi, dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re;<\/p>\n
Olay yerine sa\u011fl\u0131k g\u00f6revlilerinin gelmesi \u00fczerine san\u0131\u011f\u0131n olay\u0131n verdi\u011fi \u015fokla \u201c\u00f6lm\u00fc\u015f m\u00fc\u201d \u015feklinde iki kez sordu\u011fu, ancak cevap alamay\u0131nca i\u00e7inde bulundu\u011fu psikolojik durum ve travman\u0131n etkisinin olu\u015fturdu\u011fu anl\u0131k k\u0131zg\u0131nl\u0131kla \u201c\u00f6lmediyse bir kez daha saplayay\u0131m\u201d \u015feklinde bir ifadesinin oldu\u011fu, ancak san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6l\u00fcm olay\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftikten sonra kendili\u011finden yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n[12], san\u0131\u011f\u0131n usule uygun al\u0131nan beyan\u0131 ve savunmas\u0131 olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fi, <\/p>\n
Husumet<\/p>\n
San\u0131k T. ile ve maktul A.\u2019n\u0131n tan\u0131\u015f\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131n 5 ila 6 y\u0131l oldu\u011fu, dosya i\u00e7eri\u011fine g\u00f6re taraflar aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek bir husumetin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131,<\/p>\n
Failin Fiili Kendili\u011finden mi, Yoksa Engel Bir Nedenden Dolay\u0131 m\u0131 Son Verdi\u011fi<\/p>\n
San\u0131\u011f\u0131n, fiili icray\u0131 durdurmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirecek zorlay\u0131c\u0131 bir neden bulunmaks\u0131z\u0131n kendili\u011finden son verdi\u011fi,<\/p>\n
Anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Yarg\u0131tay\u2019\u0131n konuyla ilgili ortaya koydu\u011fu kriterler somut olaya uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n ve fiilinin \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye de\u011fil, yaralamaya d\u00f6n\u00fck oldu\u011fu, bu nedenle san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda kasten insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan verilen mahkumiyet karar\u0131n\u0131n hatal\u0131 oldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Ceza muhakemesinin en \u00f6nemli ilkelerinden olan \u201c\u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r\u201d ilkesi uyar\u0131nca; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bir su\u00e7tan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n temel \u015fart\u0131, su\u00e7un \u015f\u00fcpheye yer b\u0131rakmayacak bir \u015fekilde ispatlanmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. Olduk\u00e7a geni\u015f bir uygulama alan\u0131 bulan bu ilke; bir su\u00e7un ger\u00e7ekten i\u015flenip i\u015flenmedi\u011fi veya su\u00e7 niteli\u011finin belirlenmesi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan uygulanaca\u011f\u0131 gibi, eylemin ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi konusunda \u015f\u00fcphe bulunmas\u0131 halinde de uygulanacakt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Buna g\u00f6re; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n arkada\u015f\u0131 olan maktul\u00fc \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek herhangi bir sebebin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu konuda san\u0131k aleyhine \u015f\u00fcphenin yenilmedi\u011fi, kullan\u0131lan vas\u0131tan\u0131n niteli\u011fi, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye d\u00f6n\u00fck oldu\u011funda \u015f\u00fcphenin a\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131 ve \u015f\u00fcphenin de san\u0131k lehine de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye y\u00f6nelik kast\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu nedenle san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7undan 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK m.87\/4 uyar\u0131nca h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi halde, s\u0131rf san\u0131\u011f\u0131n maktul\u00fcn \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcnden sonra k\u0131zg\u0131nl\u0131kla veya \u015fuursuzca s\u00f6yledi\u011fi s\u00f6zlerin \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koymayaca\u011f\u0131, b\u0131\u00e7akl\u0131 darbe say\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n birden fazla olmas\u0131n\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koymayaca\u011f\u0131, burada maktuldeki yara yerlerinin \u00f6nemli olmas\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131nda, san\u0131k ile maktul aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek husumetin bulunmamas\u0131n\u0131n ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n fiiline devam etmeyip fiilini kendili\u011finden sonland\u0131rmas\u0131n\u0131n da dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmelidir.<\/p>\n
Nitekim bu yaz\u0131m\u0131z\u0131n 6 numaral\u0131 dipnotunda yer verdi\u011fimiz yer verdi\u011fimiz emsal nitelik ta\u015f\u0131yan Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 09.04.2025 tarih, 2023\/6389 E., 2025\/2705 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; \u201cSan\u0131\u011f\u0131n, kat\u0131lan\u0131 tek b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi ile yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k ile kat\u0131lan aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek d\u00fczeyde husumet bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine devam etmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir beyan\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ciddi bir engel hal olmadan kat\u0131lan\u0131n yaralanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine eylemine kendili\u011finden son verdi\u011fi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011finin \u015f\u00fcpheli kald\u0131\u011f\u0131, kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu, temel cezada alt s\u0131n\u0131rdan uzakla\u015f\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmesinin\u201d hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 kabul edildi\u011fi ve mahkumiyet h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn bozuldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir.<\/p>\n
III. Sonu\u00e7<\/p>\n
Kast\u0131n belirlenmesinde; su\u00e7 nedeni, kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi, kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli, isabet al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge, darbe adedi ve \u015fiddeti, failin su\u00e7tan \u00f6nceki ve sonraki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, aradaki husumet, hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yerleri ve nitelikleri, failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi, yoksa engel bir nedenden dolay\u0131 m\u0131 son verdi\u011fi gibi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerin esas al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihad\u0131 ile belirlenmi\u015ftir. Failin kast\u0131n\u0131n ne oldu\u011funu belirlerken, en \u00f6nemli husus fiili ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi andaki kast\u0131d\u0131r. Bu sebeple, o andaki kast\u0131 tespit etmek i\u00e7in belirlenen kriterler somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131 ile bir b\u00fct\u00fcn i\u00e7inde de\u011ferlendirilmelidir.<\/p>\n
Son olarak; \u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r ilkesine g\u00f6re, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n bir su\u00e7tan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n temel \u015fart\u0131, su\u00e7un \u015f\u00fcpheye yer vermeyen bir kesinlikle ispat edilmesine ba\u011fl\u0131d\u0131r. San\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesinde \u015f\u00fcphe olmas\u0131 halinde, \u015f\u00fcpheden san\u0131k yararlan\u0131r ilkesi gere\u011fince kast\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu kabul edilmeli ve TCK m.87\/4 uygulanmal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Prof. Dr. Ersan \u015een<\/p>\n
Av. Mert Mavi\u015f<\/p>\n
Stj. Av. Ece Efeo\u011flu<\/p>\n
(Bu makale, say\u0131n Prof. Dr. Ersan \u015eEN taraf\u0131ndan www.hukukihaber.net sitesinde yay\u0131nlanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in kaleme al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Kaynak g\u00f6sterilse dahi makalenin tamam\u0131 \u00f6zel izin al\u0131nmadan kullan\u0131lamaz. Ancak al\u0131nt\u0131lanan makalenin bir b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc, aktif link verilerek kullan\u0131labilir. Yazar\u0131 ve kayna\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6sterilmeden k\u0131smen ya da tamamen yay\u0131nlanmas\u0131 \u015fahsi haklara ve fikri haklara ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil eder.)<\/p>\n
——————-<\/p>\n
[1] Mahmut Koca, \u0130lhan \u00dcz\u00fclmez, T\u00fcrk Ceza Hukuku Genel H\u00fck\u00fcmler, 14. Bask\u0131, Se\u00e7kin Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara, 2021, s. 246.<\/p>\n
[2] Hasan Tahsin G\u00f6kcan, Mustafa Artu\u00e7, Yorumlu-Uygulamal\u0131 T\u00fcrk Ceza Kanunu \u015eerhi, 3. Cilt, Adalet Yay\u0131nevi, Ankara, 2021, s.3363-3367.<\/p>\n
[3] Mahmut Koca, \u0130lhan \u00dcz\u00fclmez, \u201cKasten Yaralama Sonucu \u00d6l\u00fcme Neden Olma (TCK m.87\/4)\u201d, \u0130stanbul \u00dcniversitesi Hukuk Fak\u00fcltesi Mecmuas\u0131 Cilt: 71, Say\u0131: 1, 2013, s. 814.<\/p>\n
[4] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 08.07.2003 g\u00fcn ve 196-212; 30.09.2003 g\u00fcn ve 226-229; 08.07.2008 g\u00fcn ve 88-184 ile 31.03.2009 g\u00fcn ve 248-82 K., 13.02.2018 g\u00fcn ve 2017\/1-1029 E., 2018\/38 K.<\/p>\n
[5] Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 10.06.2021, 2020\/165 E. ve 2021\/273 K.<\/p>\n
[6] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 09.04.2025 tarih, 2023\/6389 E., 2025\/2705 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla; \u201cSan\u0131\u011f\u0131n, kat\u0131lan\u0131 tek b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesi ile yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131k ile kat\u0131lan aras\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek d\u00fczeyde husumet bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, tan\u0131k anlat\u0131mlar\u0131nda san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine devam etmeye \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir beyan\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve san\u0131\u011f\u0131n ciddi bir engel hal olmadan kat\u0131lan\u0131n yaralanmas\u0131 \u00fczerine eylemine kendili\u011finden son verdi\u011fi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131 ile hareket etti\u011finin \u015f\u00fcpheli kald\u0131\u011f\u0131, kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralamaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu, temel cezada alt s\u0131n\u0131rdan uzakla\u015f\u0131larak h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeden su\u00e7 vasf\u0131nda yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclmesinin\u201d hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle h\u00fckm\u00fcn bozulmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 22.03.2023 tarihli, 2022\/571 E., 2023\/173 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda; \u201cSan\u0131k savunmas\u0131 ve kat\u0131lan beyanlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, taraflar\u0131n dedelerinden miras kalan arsadan kaynaklanan ihtilaf\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeyi gerektirecek derecede bir husumet boyutunda bulunmamas\u0131, bu hususun, maktul\u00fcn kendisiyle ayn\u0131 araca binmeyi ve birlikte alkol almay\u0131 kabul etti\u011fine ili\u015fkin aksi kan\u0131tlanamayan san\u0131k savunmas\u0131yla \u00f6rt\u00fc\u015fmesi, k\u00fct bir cisim ve yumrukla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen maktuldeki yaralanmalar\u0131n, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesi haricinde, hafif nitelik ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131, ba\u015f b\u00f6lgesindeki yaralanmalar\u0131n ise kafa kubbe ve kaide k\u0131r\u0131\u011f\u0131na yol a\u00e7mamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6l\u00fcm sonucunu do\u011furacak nitelik ve niceli\u011fe sahip olmamas\u0131, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimine g\u00f6re hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131 da oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine kendili\u011finden son vererek tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131na g\u00f6re maktul\u00fc hastaneye g\u00f6t\u00fcrmek suretiyle maktul\u00fc kurtarmaya y\u00f6nelik \u00e7aba g\u00f6stermesi hususlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n eylemine ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan kast\u0131n\u0131n kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu\u201d kabul edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
[7] Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 06.02.2025 tarihli, 2023\/6689 E., 2025\/837 K.<\/p>\n
[8] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 09.06.2011 tarih, 2011\/416 E. ve 2011\/3742 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131. Kararda; \u201c(\u2026)san\u0131\u011f\u0131n geri \u00e7ekilerek yak\u0131n mesafeden maktul\u00fcn sol baca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 hedef alarak iki el ate\u015f etti\u011fi, engel olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde eylemini s\u00fcrd\u00fcrmeyip ka\u00e7\u0131p gitti\u011fi, maktul\u00fcn sol femur ve sol tibia b\u00f6lgelerinden giri\u015f \u00e7\u0131k\u0131\u015f yapan mermi isabetleriyle yaraland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve sol femur b\u00f6lgesinde damar delinmesine ba\u011fl\u0131 d\u0131\u015f kanama sonucu \u00f6ld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc olayda, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n kast\u0131n\u0131n yaralama olarak vas\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131larak 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK\u2019n\u0131n 87\/4. maddesi uyar\u0131nca cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekirken yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrmek su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 suretiyle fazla ceza tayini(\u2026)\u201d bozma gerek\u00e7esi yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
[9] Yarg\u0131tay 1. Ceza Dairesi\u2019nin 20.11.2017 tarihli, 2017\/2609 E., 2017\/4050 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131na g\u00f6re: \u201cSan\u0131klar ve maktul\u00fcn aralar\u0131ndaki alacak verecek meselesini konu\u015fmak i\u00e7in bulu\u015ftuklar\u0131nda aralar\u0131nda \u00e7\u0131kan tart\u0131\u015fma s\u0131ras\u0131nda san\u0131k …’un maktule yumruk ve tekme ile vurarak yere d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcrmesinden sonra san\u0131k …’un 3 b\u0131\u00e7ak darbesiyle maktul\u00fc sa\u011f uyluk ve sol uyluk b\u00f6lgelerinden yaralad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kesilerden bir tanesinin popliteal arter ve ven kesilerine neden olmas\u0131 nedeniyle maktul\u00fcn i\u00e7 ve d\u0131\u015f kan kayb\u0131 ve buna ba\u011fl\u0131 geli\u015fen komplikasyonlar sonucu hayat\u0131n\u0131 kaybetti\u011fi olayda, Darbelerin y\u00f6neltildi\u011fi v\u00fccut b\u00f6lgeleri ve nitelikleri ile engel bir durum bulunmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen san\u0131klar\u0131n eylemlerine kendiliklerinden son vermeleri dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, eylemlerinin kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7unu olu\u015fturdu\u011fu ve haklar\u0131nda 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 TCK’nun 37\/1. maddesi delaletiyle 87\/4. Maddesi uyar\u0131nca h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeksizin, su\u00e7 niteli\u011finde yan\u0131lg\u0131ya d\u00fc\u015f\u00fclerek yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7undan h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131\u201d bozma sebebi olarak de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
[10] \u201cKasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma ile kasten yaralaman\u0131n di\u011fer \u015fekilleri fiil tekli\u011fi halinde birle\u015febilirler. \u00d6rne\u011fin \u00f6nce kasten yaralaman\u0131n temel \u015feklini i\u015flemek i\u00e7in ma\u011fdura sald\u0131ran (m. 86\/1), daha sonra sald\u0131r\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 b\u0131\u00e7akla s\u00fcrd\u00fcren (m. 86\/3), baca\u011f\u0131na saplanan b\u0131\u00e7a\u011f\u0131n ana damar\u0131 kesmesi nedeniyle ma\u011fdurun bitkisel hayata girmesine (m. 87\/2) ve daha sonra da \u00f6lmesine (m. 87\/4) neden olan ki\u015fi, hukuki anlamda yaln\u0131zca 87\/4. maddenin tipikli\u011fini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirmi\u015f olur.\u201d Mahmut Koca, \u0130lhan \u00dcz\u00fclmez, \u201cKasten Yaralama Sonucu \u00d6l\u00fcme Neden Olma (TCK m.87\/4)\u201d, \u0130stanbul \u00dcniversitesi Hukuk Fak\u00fcltesi Mecmuas\u0131 C\u0130lt:71, Say\u0131: 1, 2013, s. 814.<\/p>\n
[11] Benzer y\u00f6nde bkz. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu 13.02.2018 g\u00fcn ve 2017\/1-1029 E., 2018\/38 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131na g\u00f6re; \u201cSu\u00e7 nedeni, su\u00e7ta kullan\u0131lan aletin cinsi, kullan\u0131l\u0131\u015f \u015fekli, isabet al\u0131nan b\u00f6lge, darbe adedi ve \u015fiddeti, failin su\u00e7tan \u00f6nceki ve sonraki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, aradaki husumet, hedef se\u00e7me imkan\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ma\u011fdurdaki yaralar\u0131n yerleri ve nitelikleri, failin fiiline kendili\u011finden mi, yoksa engel bir nedenden dolay\u0131 m\u0131 son verdi\u011fi gibi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler esas al\u0131nmak suretiyle kast\u0131n saptanmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmektedir.\u201d Ersin \u015eare, \u201cY\u00fcksek Mahkeme Kararlar\u0131nda Kasten Yaralama Sonucu \u00d6l\u00fcme Neden Olma Su\u00e7u (TCK m. 87\/4)\u201d, Dicle \u00dcniversitesi Hukuk Fak\u00fcltesi Dergisi, Cilt:25, Say\u0131: 43, 2020, s. 300-301.<\/p>\n
[12] Bkz. Yarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu, 22.12.2022 tarihli ve 2022\/388 E., 2022\/824 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131.\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
I. Giri\u015f Yaralama fiilinin \u00f6l\u00fcmle neticelendi\u011fi durumlarda su\u00e7 vasf\u0131n\u0131n tayini, yani fiilin neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f yaralama (TCK m.87\/4) su\u00e7u mu, yoksa insan \u00f6ld\u00fcrme (TCK m.81) su\u00e7u kapsam\u0131nda m\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi, bu su\u00e7lar i\u00e7in \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen cezalar dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan fail i\u00e7in hayatidir. \u00d6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi, \u00f6zellikle neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f kasten yaralama ile kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131mda b\u00fcy\u00fck \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131r. Di\u011fer bir ifadeyle, kasten \u00f6ld\u00fcrme su\u00e7u ile kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme neden olma su\u00e7u aras\u0131ndaki ay\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 kriterden en \u00f6nemlisi manevi unsur farkl\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla; su\u00e7un vas\u0131fland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fclmesi gereken konu, failin kast\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcrmeye mi, yoksa yaralamaya m\u0131 y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkindir. Bu yaz\u0131m\u0131zda; ay\u0131r\u0131ma esas te\u015fkil eden \u201c\u00f6ld\u00fcrme kast\u0131n\u0131n\u201d varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespiti i\u00e7in dikkate al\u0131nan \u015fartlara\/kriterlere ve konu ile ilgili hukuki de\u011ferlendirmelere yer verece\u011fiz. II. Geli\u015fme Farkl\u0131 sonu\u00e7lara yol a\u00e7mas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6\u011fretide ger\u00e7ek veya g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fc\u015fte neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7 ay\u0131r\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. Temel su\u00e7 tipine ili\u015fkin hareket yap\u0131ld\u0131ktan sonra ger\u00e7ekle\u015fen ikinci netice ba\u015fka bir su\u00e7 tipine giriyorsa, ger\u00e7ek neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7 olu\u015fur. Kasten yaralama sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcme sebebiyet verme su\u00e7u ger\u00e7ek neticesi sebebiyle a\u011f\u0131rla\u015fm\u0131\u015f su\u00e7tur[1]. TCK m.87\/4\u2019\u00fcn uygulanabilmesi i\u00e7in failin yaralama kast\u0131 ile hareket etmesi, ma\u011fdurun TCK m.86\/1 ve 3. f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen \u015fekilde yaralanmas\u0131 ve failin eylemi ile ma\u011fdurun \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc aras\u0131nda illiyet ba\u011f\u0131 bulunmas\u0131 gereklidir[2]. Belirtmeliyiz ki; …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-152920","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n