In short
An acquittal is the decision in which the court did not build a conviction as regards the offence charged. It is given at the end of the prosecution. The public prosecutor's office's decision that there is no ground for prosecution, discontinuance formed by giving up the complaint, and a decision that there is no ground to impose a penalty, are not an acquittal clause. The reasoning is read according to which sentence is written in the judgment. An acquittal that has not become final can change while the route of appeal continues.
What is looked for in the operative clause
An acquittal is the closing judgment of a prosecution with a hearing. The charge in the indictment has come to the court, the evidence has been weighed, and the result has been written in the clause as an acquittal. It is not enough that the minute only says "the file closed". The name of the closing stands in the operative part of the short decision. If the reasoned decision is written later, the reasoning does not turn the clause in the short decision into another result. If the clause and the reasoning contradict each other, the contradiction is seen by placing both texts in the file side by side. If one of the texts is missing, the missing piece is not treated as completed.
If the defendant is tried for more than one offence, the acquittal is read separately for each offence. A conviction may have been built on one charge and an acquittal on the other. Which offence was tied to which clause in the short decision is looked for line by line. The whole of the file is not told as if it had ended in acquittal before the lines are separated. If there is an additional defence, or an expansion of the indictment, which act the acquittal concerns is read from that expanded charge.
The judgment may have been pronounced at the hearing where the defendant was present. If they were not present, service is required. Pronouncement shows that the acquittal exists. It does not by itself show whether the route of appeal has closed. The endorsement is looked for in the pronouncement minute or on the service piece.
The short decision, the reasoned decision and the service carry the same result on three separate papers. The reading is made when these three papers are placed side by side. If the reasoned decision has not yet been served, the clause in the short decision is not ignored. If the short decision is not in hand, a judgment is not invented from the last line of the hearing minute. If the defendant has defence counsel, or the intervening party has a representative, to whom service was made is also read from the endorsement. Service made on the representative is not erased as if it had never been notified to the principal. Service made on the principal is not ignored either if the representative line stands.
The type of reasoning changes the account
The statute does not recognise a single reasoning for an acquittal. It being established that the act was not committed by the defendant is the determination that the event charged does not belong to the defendant. The act not being defined as an offence in the statute is the criminal norm not fitting this event even if the event is established. It not being established that the offence was committed by the defendant is the evidence not being found sufficient for a conviction. The act not being contrary to law is acceptance of a ground of lawfulness. Absence of intent or negligence is a conviction not being built on the fault side.
All of these reasonings do not build a conviction. They do not all tell the same story. An acquittal given because the evidence was not enough is not an announcement that the act never happened. An acquittal in which it is established that the act was not committed by the defendant is not a file in which only doubt continues either. The complainant, the intervening party or the defendant reads this distinction from the reasoned decision. If the reasoning has not yet been written, the clause in the short decision is not put in the place of the reasoning sentence.
A decision that there is no ground to impose a penalty is not inside this list. The act may have been determined. The penalty not being built rests on a ground the statute kept apart, such as effective remorse or personal impunity. If this name is written in the operative clause, the result is not read as an acquittal. A decision in which a security measure was ordered is not an acquittal clause either. The name of the measure is read as it stands in the clause.
The reasoning is not guessed from the last word at the hearing or from the public prosecutor's opinion. The opinion may have asked for a conviction and the court may have built an acquittal. The reverse also happens. The result is the name of the operative clause, not of the opinion. If more than one possibility was weighed in the reasoning, which one the court accepted is read from the acceptance sentence. The discussion sentence does not take the place of the acceptance sentence.
The complaint can be a ground of discontinuance
In offences that depend on a complaint, the complaint is the condition looked for in order for the action to be able to run. The complaint never being made is not the same door as an acquittal given after the prosecution was opened. While there is no complaint at all, the investigation often closes before it reaches a court judgment. The name of that closing is read from the public prosecutor's papers. How the investigation proceeds is in the article on a public prosecutor's investigation.
Giving up the complaint can be a ground of discontinuance in the offences the statute looks for and at the moment it looks for. Discontinuance is not the defendant being cleared. The court closes the action on procedure without tying, with the reasoning of an acquittal, whether the charged act was committed. Even if the statement of giving up has passed into the hearing minute, the file is not treated as discontinued if there is no discontinuance in the operative clause. If the offence does not depend on a complaint, the complainant giving up does not turn the judgment into an acquittal or into discontinuance. If there is more than one complainant, whether the giving up binds the others is read from the rule in the statute and from the statements in the minute.
The status of intervening party does not produce an acquittal either. Intervention is the complainant or the person who suffered harm entering the prosecution. The intervening party can apply to the route the statute grants against the acquittal decision. The application having been made does not of itself remove the acquittal. If no application is made, or the route is exhausted, the acquittal becomes final. Which authority is the appeal and which is cassation is in the article on appeal and cassation. The period is followed from there if it is written on the pronouncement or service endorsement.
A final acquittal does not of itself open a new trial for the same act. Renewal of the trial is tied to separate grounds in the statute. A new petition is not treated as having restarted the action while those grounds are not in the judgment and in the statute. If there is a claim of a ground, the claim is read together with the endorsement of finality in hand and the fact relied on.
Expiry of the complaint period is not an acquittal either. The period is read from the rule in the statute, from the date of the complaint and from the moment the offence was learned of. If the date is not in the file, it is not assumed that the period expired. If the period has passed, the closing is often in the form of discontinuance or a decision that there is no ground for prosecution. This closing is not told as a determination that the defendant did not commit the act. The death of the holder of the right to complain can also give birth to the result the statute tied. That result is again read from the name in the operative clause. If there is no acquittal in the clause, the file is not treated as having ended in acquittal.
Being released is not an acquittal
Lifting of pre-trial detention, judicial control ending, or the defendant being released, does not mean an acquittal was written in the operative clause. A protective measure is a temporary precaution given while the charge continues. An acquittal is the final judgment built about the charge. If the measure has been lifted and the judgment is not yet an acquittal, the file continues. If the judgment is an acquittal and the measure has ended separately, the two lines are read apart. On which condition pre-trial detention is given is in the article on a detention decision. The frame of a judicial-control obligation is in the article on judicial control.
An acquittal does not close private-law damages inside this page. The criminal court not building a conviction does not mean the claim in the civil court was refused of itself. An acquittal for insufficient evidence and an acquittal in which it is established that the act was not committed by the defendant do not bind the account in the civil jurisdiction in the same way either. Whether they bind is read from the civil action's own rules. This text does not build that action.
If a conviction line was not built
An acquittal is not a result that takes the place of a conviction record, because it is not a conviction. If there is no conviction line on the record at all, there is no judgment from which the archive arrangement provided for convictions would run either. If a conviction line nevertheless stands on the certificate, the operative clause and the line are compared first. If there is a contradiction, the subject is correction. While there is no contradiction, the acquittal is not counted as having lifted a conviction in another file. Each judgment carries its own line.
Deferral of the announcement of the verdict does not say there is no conviction, as an acquittal does. Holding back enforcement of an announced sentence is not an acquittal either. The conditions of these two decisions, and their fate on the record, are read from their own judgments. The acquittal clause is not pasted in their place. A judicial fine is not written in an acquittal clause either. If there is a monetary sanction in the clause, that line is not an acquittal.
Seizure of property is not the acquittal clause itself either. Even if an acquittal was given, the fate of the seized property stands in a separate decision or on the line of the clause that concerns the property. If there is no line, it is not assumed that the property was returned. If there is a confiscation decision, that decision is not read in the place of the acquittal sentence. The two can stand side by side in the same judgment. Which one concerns which property is read from the description of the property.
Conclusion
An acquittal is a conviction not having been built at the end of the prosecution. The type of reasoning, the fate of the complaint and the route of appeal are read together with the name in the clause. A decision not to prosecute and discontinuance are not the same paper. If a conviction line did not form, a conviction archive does not arise from that judgment either. The framework is on the criminal law page. The types of judgment are in the text of Criminal Procedure Code No. 5271, and the definition of the offence is in the text of Turkish Criminal Code No. 5237. The short decision and the reasoning can be read side by side through contact.