{"id":11314,"date":"2026-06-13T08:06:00","date_gmt":"2026-06-13T08:06:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/2026\/06\/13\/yargitay-12-ceza-dairesinin-2025-4488-e-2025-5031-k-sayili-karari\/"},"modified":"2026-06-13T08:06:00","modified_gmt":"2026-06-13T08:06:00","slug":"yargitay-12-ceza-dairesinin-2025-4488-e-2025-5031-k-sayili-karari","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/2026\/06\/13\/yargitay-12-ceza-dairesinin-2025-4488-e-2025-5031-k-sayili-karari\/","title":{"rendered":"Yarg\u0131tay 12. Ceza Dairesi&#8217;nin 2025\/4488 E., 2025\/5031 K. say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><strong>T.C.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>Yarg\u0131tay<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>12. Hukuk Dairesi <\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>2025\/4488 E., 2025\/5031 K.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p><strong>&#8220;\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni&#8221;<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Esas No : 2025\/4488<br \/>\nKarar No : 2025\/5031<br \/>\nTebli\u011fname No : KYB &#8211; 2025\/71210<\/p>\n<p>Nafaka h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine uymamak su\u00e7undan san\u0131k &#8230;&#8217;n\u0131n, 2004 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130cra ve \u0130flas Kanunu\u2019nun 344. maddesi gere\u011fince 3 aya kadar tazyik hapsi cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na dair Mudanya \u0130cra Ceza Mahkemesinin 06.10.2023 tarihli ve 2023\/5 Esas, 2023\/19 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan itiraz\u0131n reddine ili\u015fkin mercii Mudanya 3. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinin 09.11.2023 tarihli ve 2023\/143 de\u011fi\u015fik i\u015f say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131 aleyhine Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 02.06.2025 g\u00fcn ve 94660652-105-16-12943-2024-KYB say\u0131l\u0131 kanun yarar\u0131na bozma istemini i\u00e7eren yaz\u0131s\u0131 ekindeki dava dosyas\u0131 Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n 24.06.2025 g\u00fcn ve KYB-2025\/71210 say\u0131l\u0131 ihbarnamesi ile Dairemize g\u00f6nderilmekle okundu.<\/p>\n<p>An\u0131lan ihbarnamede;<\/p>\n<p>Dosya kapsam\u0131na g\u00f6re, bor\u00e7lu san\u0131k &#8230; hakk\u0131nda e\u015fi ile aralar\u0131ndaki bo\u015fanma davas\u0131na ili\u015fkin yarg\u0131lama esnas\u0131nda, Mudanya 2. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2022\/138 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131ndan verilen 09.05.2022 tarihli ara karar ile toplam 90.000,00 T\u00fcrk Liras\u0131 tedbir nafakas\u0131na h\u00fckmedildi\u011fi, an\u0131lan tedbir nafakas\u0131na istinaden bor\u00e7lu san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda Mudanya \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2022\/1832 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131 ile icra takibi ba\u015flat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 2023 y\u0131l\u0131 Ocak, \u015eubat ve Mart aylar\u0131na ili\u015fkin bahse konu nafaka borcunu \u00f6demedi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla m\u00fc\u015fteki\/alacakl\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan 28.04.2023 tarihinde \u015fikayette bulunulmas\u0131 \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda Mudanya \u0130cra Ceza Mahkemesinin 06.10.2023 tarihli karar\u0131 ile san\u0131\u011f\u0131n yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde tazyik hapsi ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi somut olayda,<br \/>\nYarg\u0131tay Ceza Genel Kurulu\u2019nun 19.04.2005 tarihli ve 2005\/17-7 Esas, 2005\/37 Say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere, 5358 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019la de\u011fi\u015fik 2004 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130cra ve \u0130flas Kanunu\u2019nun 344. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ve \u015fik\u00e2yete tabi bulunan nafaka h\u00fckm\u00fcne uymamak su\u00e7unun olu\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in, nafaka \u00f6denmesinin kesinle\u015fmi\u015f bir mahkeme karar\u0131na dayanmas\u0131, ayl\u0131k nafakan\u0131n tahsili i\u00e7in icra takibine ba\u015flan\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve icra emrinin bor\u00e7lu-san\u0131\u011fa tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131, bor\u00e7lunun ilamda yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u00f6deme ko\u015fullar\u0131na uymamas\u0131, ayl\u0131k nafakaya h\u00fckmedilmesi halinde icra emrinin tebli\u011fi ile \u015fikayet tarihi aras\u0131nda i\u015flemi\u015f en az bir ayl\u0131k cari nafaka borcunun bulunmas\u0131, bor\u00e7lu-san\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan nafakan\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 veya azalt\u0131lmas\u0131 hususunda a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f bir davan\u0131n bulunmamas\u0131, dava a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise sonu\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 ve \u015fikayet hakk\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7un i\u015flendi\u011finin \u00f6\u011frenilmesinden itibaren 3 ay ve her halde i\u015flenmesinden itibaren 1 y\u0131l i\u00e7inde kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi,<\/p>\n<p>Benzer bir olaya ili\u015fkin olarak Yarg\u0131tay 12. Hukuk Dairesinin 27.11.2023 tarihli ve 2013\/27562 Esas, 2013\/37619 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131nda yer alan, &#8220;Somut olayda, icra takibinin dayana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n \u0130zmir 6. Aile Mahkemesince bo\u015fanma davas\u0131n\u0131n yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 s\u0131ras\u0131nda daval\u0131 e\u015f ve m\u00fc\u015fterek \u00e7ocuklar yarar\u0131na ara karar\u0131 ile tedbir niteli\u011finde h\u00fck\u00fcm alt\u0131na al\u0131nan nafaka alaca\u011f\u0131 oldu\u011fu, 18.06.2013 tarihli s\u00f6z konusu ara karar\u0131n\u0131n bor\u00e7lu (daval\u0131) vekili Av. &#8230; ve alacakl\u0131 (davac\u0131) vekili Av. &#8230; huzuru ile verildi\u011fi ve bu hususun duru\u015fma tutana\u011f\u0131nda belirtildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 73. maddesinde, davaya vekaletin, h\u00fck\u00fcm kesinle\u015finceye kadar, vekilin davan\u0131n takibi i\u00e7in gereken b\u00fct\u00fcn i\u015flemleri yapmas\u0131na ve h\u00fckm\u00fcn yerine getirilmesine ili\u015fkin yetkiyi kapsayaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131n d\u00fczenlendi\u011fi, ayn\u0131 Kanunun 74. maddesine g\u00f6re vekile tebligat yap\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in vekalette \u00f6zel yetki verilmesinin gerekmedi\u011fi, bor\u00e7lu vekilinin azil ve istifas\u0131 da s\u00f6zkonusu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na g\u00f6re yukar\u0131da belirtilen emredici nitelikteki tebligat ve usul h\u00fck\u00fcmleri uyar\u0131nca tebligat\u0131n bor\u00e7lu vekili Av&#8230;&#8217;a yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Bu durumda, derdest bo\u015fanma davas\u0131 nedeni ile alacakl\u0131, bor\u00e7lunun bir vekil ile kendini temsil ettirdi\u011fini \u00f6\u011frenmi\u015f olup tebligat\u0131n vekile yap\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in icra dosyas\u0131nda bor\u00e7lu vekiline ait vekaletnamenin bulunmamas\u0131 sonuca etkili de\u011fildir. Kald\u0131 ki vekaletnamenin icra dosyas\u0131na ibraz edilmemesi, tebligat\u0131n vekile yap\u0131lmas\u0131 hususundaki yasal zorunlulu\u011fun art\u0131k ortadan kalkt\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015feklinde yorumlanamaz. O halde mahkemece, \u015fikayetin kabul\u00fcne karar verilmesi gerekirken icra dosyas\u0131na bor\u00e7lu vekilinin vekaletnamesinin verilmedi\u011finden bahisle sonuca gidilmesi ve \u015fikayetin reddine y\u00f6nelik yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesisi isabetsizdir.&#8221; \u015feklindeki,<\/p>\n<div data-channel=\"121\" data-advert=\"temedya\" data-rotation=\"120\" class=\"mb-3 text-center\"><\/div>\n<div data-channel=\"121\" data-advert=\"temedya\" data-rotation=\"120\" class=\"mb-3 text-center\"><\/div>\n<p>Yine benzer bir olaya ili\u015fkin olarak Yarg\u0131tay 8. Hukuk Dairesinin 30.05.2016 tarihli ve 2016\/7148 Esas, 2016\/9420 Karar say\u0131l\u0131 ilam\u0131nda yer alan, &#8221; Bor\u00e7lu vekili \u0130cra Mahkemesi&#8217;ne yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u015fvurusunda; icra emrinin, vekil oldu\u011fu halde asile \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, asile g\u00f6nderilen icra emrinin iptalini talep etmi\u015ftir. Mahkemece \u015fikayetin reddi ile bor\u00e7lu vekiline icra emri tebli\u011fine karar verilmi\u015f olup h\u00fck\u00fcm bor\u00e7lu velikince temyiz edilmi\u015ftir. HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 73, 81, 82, 83, Avukatl\u0131k Kanunu&#8217;nun 41., Tebligat Kanunu&#8217;nun 11. maddeleri gere\u011fince vekille takip edilen i\u015flerde vekile tebligat zorunludur. An\u0131lan bu d\u00fczenlemeler gere\u011fince tebligat\u0131n vekile yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ile yasal s\u00fcreler i\u015flemeye ba\u015flar, yine bu tarihe g\u00f6re takip kesinle\u015ftirilerek takibe devam i\u015flemleri yap\u0131l\u0131r. Ne var ki vekile tebli\u011f zorunlulu\u011funun bulunmas\u0131 asile tebligat yap\u0131lmas\u0131 l\u00fczumunu ortadan kald\u0131rmaz. \u015e\u00f6yle ki, 2004 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130cra-\u0130flas Kanunu&#8217;nun 76. maddesinde mal beyan\u0131nda bulunmamak su\u00e7u, 338. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen hakikate muhalif beyanda bulunma su\u00e7u gibi icra-iflas su\u00e7lar\u0131nda bor\u00e7lunun cezaland\u0131r\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in icra emrinin bor\u00e7lunun vekiline de\u011fil, kendisine tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 gerekir. (Prof.Dr. Baki Kuru, Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usul\u00fc, 6. bask\u0131, cilt 2, sh: 1280) Cezalar\u0131n \u015fahsili\u011fi kural\u0131 gere\u011fince bor\u00e7lu asilin cezai y\u00f6nden sorumlu tutulabilmesi i\u00e7in icra emrinin bor\u00e7lu asile tebli\u011fi zorunludur. Somut olayda; bor\u00e7lu vekili \u015fikayetinde bo\u015fanma ilam\u0131nda vekil oldu\u011fu halde icra takibinde asile \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan icra emri tebligat\u0131n\u0131n kendisine yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi nedeniyle iptalini istemi\u015ftir. Mahkemenin de kabul\u00fcnde oldu\u011fu \u00fczere asile yap\u0131lan tebligat\u0131n iptali gerekmez ise de vekile de tebligat \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde \u015fikayetin kabul\u00fc gerekirken \u015fikayetin reddi do\u011fru de\u011fildir.&#8221; \u015feklindeki a\u00e7\u0131klamalar nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda,<\/p>\n<p>Somut olayda, bahse konu bo\u015fanma davas\u0131na ili\u015fkin yarg\u0131lama esnas\u0131nda, Mudanya 2. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinin 2022\/138 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131ndan verilen 09.05.2022 tarihli karar ile tedbir nafakas\u0131na h\u00fckmedildi\u011fi, an\u0131lan tedbir nafakas\u0131na istinaden bor\u00e7lu san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda Mudanya \u0130cra M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn 2022\/1832 Esas say\u0131l\u0131 dosyas\u0131 ile icra takibi ba\u015flat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6deme emrinin bor\u00e7lu san\u0131\u011fa 03.12.2022 tarihinde; icra emrinin bor\u00e7lu san\u0131k vekiline 25.07.2023 tarihinde tebli\u011f edildi\u011fi, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n 2023 y\u0131l\u0131 Ocak, \u015eubat ve Mart aylar\u0131na ili\u015fkin bahse konu nafaka borcunu \u00f6demedi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla m\u00fc\u015fteki\/alacakl\u0131 vekili taraf\u0131ndan 28.04.2023 tarihinde \u015fikayette bulunuldu\u011fu nazara al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, yukar\u0131da belirtilen ilamlarda da de\u011finildi\u011fi \u00fczere, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7un olu\u015fabilmesi i\u00e7in ayl\u0131k nafakan\u0131n tahsili i\u00e7in icra takibine ba\u015flan\u0131lmas\u0131 ve icra emrinin de tebli\u011f edilmesi gerekti\u011fi, bu ba\u011flamda bor\u00e7lu asile yap\u0131lan tebligat\u0131n, vekiline de tebligat yap\u0131lmas\u0131 zorunlulu\u011funu ortadan kald\u0131rmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 cihetle, an\u0131lan icra takibi kapsam\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen icra emrinin bor\u00e7lu vekiline 25.07.2023 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmeden \u00f6nce alacakl\u0131 m\u00fc\u015fteki vekilinin 28.04.2023 tarihinde tazyik hapsine konu \u015fikayeti yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu itibarla at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7un unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6zetilmeden, itiraz\u0131n bu y\u00f6nden kabul\u00fc yerine yaz\u0131l\u0131 \u015fekilde reddine karar verilmesinde isabet g\u00f6r\u00fclmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu\u2019nun 309. maddesi uyar\u0131nca an\u0131lan karar\u0131n kanun yarar\u0131na bozulmas\u0131 isteminde bulunulmakla gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcl\u00fcp d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc;<\/p>\n<p>Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n kanun yarar\u0131na bozma istemine dayanan ihbarname i\u00e7eri\u011fi yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden, Mudanya 3. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesinin 09.11.2023 tarihli ve 2023\/143 de\u011fi\u015fik i\u015f say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n CMK\u2019n\u0131n 309\/4-d. maddesi uyar\u0131nca BOZULMASINA, san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda nafaka h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine uymama eyleminden dolay\u0131 h\u00fckmolunan tazyik hapsinin kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na, bu eylemle ilgili olarak san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda verilen tazyik hapsi infaz edilmekte ise derhal sal\u0131verilmesine, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 309 uncu maddesinin d\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (d) bendi uyar\u0131nca bozma nedeninin cezan\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirdi\u011fi belirlendi\u011finden, &#8220;San\u0131k &#8230;&#8217;n\u0131n \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 nafaka h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine uymamak su\u00e7unun yasal unsurlar\u0131n\u0131n olu\u015fmamas\u0131 nedeniyle CMK\u2019n\u0131n 223\/2-a maddesi gere\u011fince BERAAT\u0130NE,&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Karar tarihindeki Avukatl\u0131k Asgari \u00dccret Tarifesi dikkate al\u0131narak hesaplanan 5.600,00 TL vekalet \u00fccretinin kendisini vekil ile temsil ettiren san\u0131k lehine \u015fikayet\u00e7iden tahsiliyle san\u0131\u011fa verilmesine,\u201d<\/p>\n<p>&#8220;Yarg\u0131lama giderinin m\u00fc\u015fteki \u00fczerinde b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na,&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>Dosyan\u0131n mahalline g\u00f6nderilmek \u00fczere Yarg\u0131tay Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131na TEVD\u0130\u0130NE, 01.07.2025 tarihinde oy birli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n<div class=\"article-source py-3 small \">\n    <\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>T.C. Yarg\u0131tay 12. Hukuk Dairesi 2025\/4488 E., 2025\/5031 K. &#8220;\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni&#8221; Esas No : 2025\/4488 Karar No : 2025\/5031 Tebli\u011fname No : KYB &#8211; 2025\/71210 Nafaka h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine uymamak su\u00e7undan san\u0131k &#8230;&#8217;n\u0131n, 2004 say\u0131l\u0131 \u0130cra ve \u0130flas Kanunu\u2019nun 344. maddesi gere\u011fince 3 aya kadar tazyik hapsi cezas\u0131 ile cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na dair Mudanya \u0130cra Ceza Mahkemesinin 06.10.2023 tarihli&hellip;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":11315,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11314","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-diger"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11314","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11314"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11314\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/11315"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11314"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11314"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.avrasyahukuk.com.tr\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11314"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}