Cassation Decision Volume. 24, File No. 181958

Cassation Decision Volume. 24, File No. 181958

This post summarizes a previous decision of the Amhara National Regional State, North Showa zone high court, the regional State Supreme Court, and its Cassation bench decisions rendered on December 20, 2012 E.C, regarding an appeal from the Supreme Court.


Mr. Gebeyaw Eshetu vs North Showa region revenue prosecutor, Amhara National Regional State Cassation Bench Volume 24, File No. 181958.


The case was first initiated in the Amhara region, at the North Shewa zone high court. In this case, the respondent has prepared three criminal charges against the then applicant in the following manner, in the first case, the respondent charged the applicant for failure to pay 485,322,49 Birr tax on time during the 2005 tax year. Second, he is charged with providing forged and fraudulent receipts for revenue collection authority in violation of Article 50(3) (b) of value-added tax proclamation number 285/94 in the 2005 tax year. Third, he is also charged for his failure to pay 4517.19 Birr for tax authority which was collected from various revenues in July 2005. After the hearing of evidence, the high court found the applicant guilty and sentenced him to eight years and five months imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 Birr.

Appeal to the Federal Supreme Court

Then, the appellant, who was dissatisfied with the decision of the high court filed an appeal with the regional Supreme Court, but his application was rejected. Following this, in July 30, 2011, the appellant’s lawyer again appealed to the regional Cassation Bench, by stating that the applicant’s conviction is a misrepresentation and fundamental error of law that should be corrected.

Review at the Cassation Bench

The cassation inquiry court examined as to the involvement of the applicant on the alleged irregularities on the date and number of the 11 receipts. The court tried to consider and prove the validity of convicting the applicant in all three cases. To this end, the court also ordered the respondent to file a counterclaim.

On September 30, 2011, the respondent wrote his counterclaim by describing that the lower court decision against the applicant on the conviction of all three charges did not have any fundamental error of law and the applicant’s claim should be dismissed.

The court framed the following main points in its judgement; first, the applicant should not be found guilty by the mere fact that the above mentioned receipts are false. Second, laws that are cited by the prosecutor do not clearly specify, prove and maintaining the order of the receipts are really the obligations of the buyer. On the other hand, the prosecutor was not able to prove that the applicant was involved in criminal activity knowing the receipts were fraudulent. The court also does not find it appropriate the conviction procedures in the first and second charges. So, as far as the receipt is verified by forensic examination, the lower court should better acquit the applicant as per article 149 (2) of the criminal procedure code.

Finally, the Cassation Bench found that the high and Supreme Court’s decisions are against the basic criminal evidence assessment principles and hereby rendered the following decisions.The regional supreme court which examined the applicant’s subsequent appeal was overturned in accordance with art 195(2) (b) (1) of the court of appeal number 20465, dated July 18,2011.  For the above reasons, the applicant was acquitted of all charges brought against him by the respondent. Then based on this decision, the cassation court ordered Debrebrihan prison commission, to release the applicant today, if he is not wanted for another crime.

Related Posts

Leave a Reply