Article 216: Right and Deadline to File Dika Appeal

Décisions de la Cour suprême interprétant cette section

1. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 7212/2567 (2024)

   A Dika that merely repeats the appeal arguments and does not actually contest the Court of Appeal judgment is not proper under Section 216 paragraph one, and the Supreme Court will decline to consider it.

   The plaintiff's Dika repeated the same points made on appeal and asked to accept the charge of using a forged document, without genuinely contesting the Court of Appeal judgment. The Supreme Court dismissed the Dika as non-compliant with Section 216 paragraph one.

2. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 322/2567 (2024)

   If a party believes the Court of Appeal ordered consecutive sentences unlawfully, the remedy is a Dika under Section 216; a party who does not use that right and lets the case become final cannot later reopen the sentencing by petition.

   The defendant challenged the consecutive sentencing only after the case had become final, by a later petition rather than a Dika. The Supreme Court held that the proper channel was a Dika under Section 216, and the right could not be revived once the case was final.

3. Arrêt de la Cour suprême n° 5682/2567 (2024)

   In an ordinary criminal case where leave from the Supreme Court is not required, a Dika is governed by Sections 216 and 221; to raise fact questions the defendant must file the request for a judge's leave together with the Dika at the Court of First Instance.

   The defendant sought leave to appeal on fact questions by applying to the Supreme Court directly instead of asking a judge of the lower courts. The Supreme Court explained that in an ordinary criminal case the procedure under Sections 216 and 221 requires the leave request to be filed with the Court of First Instance together with the Dika.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.