05.08.2026 11:31
In Erzurum, Padına Avcı, who was sentenced to 17 years in prison with a reduction for unjust provocation for killing her husband Ayhan Avcı in a field hut, had her case, which came to the fore with her defense that 'He was forcing me to have relationships with other men,' concluded by the Court of Cassation. The High Court upheld the prison sentences while also rejecting Padına Avcı's request for release.
Prison sentences with unjust provocation reductions for Padına Avcı and Fahrullah Özdemir, who were tried for killing Ayhan Avcı in a field hut in Erzurum, were upheld by the Court of Cassation. The High Court also rejected Padına Avcı's request for release.
FOUND COVERED IN BLOOD IN THE HUT The incident occurred on June 11 in the Kahramanlar neighborhood of the Aziziye district. Fahrullah Özdemir called the gendarmerie and reported that he had found Ayhan Avcı covered in blood in the field hut. Gendarmerie and medical teams were dispatched to the address. The examination determined that Avcı had been killed by blows to the head and neck with a sharp object. In connection with the incident, Fahrullah Özdemir and Avcı's wife of one year, Padına Avcı, a Georgian national, were taken into custody. The two suspects were arrested after their procedures.
"HE WAS FORCING ME TO HAVE RELATIONS WITH OTHER MEN FOR 1500 LIRA" A lawsuit was filed against Padına Avcı and Fahrullah Özdemir, seeking life imprisonment for the crime of 'intentional murder'. During the trial at the Erzurum 3rd Heavy Penal Court, Padına Avcı claimed that her husband forced her to have relations with other men for 1500 TL, while Fahrullah Özdemir alleged that Ayhan Avcı, with whom he argued, attacked him with a knife. Fahrullah Özdemir stated that he struck Ayhan Avcı on the head with the iron apparatus with a knob connecting the tractor and trailer, and Padına Avcı hit him with a shovel.
The Erzurum 3rd Heavy Penal Court sentenced Padına Avcı (35) to aggravated life imprisonment for the crime of 'intentional murder against a spouse' and Fahrullah Özdemir to life imprisonment for 'intentional murder'. Applying an unjust provocation reduction for both defendants, the court reduced Avcı's sentence to 17 years and Özdemir's sentence to 15 years.
APPEAL REQUESTS REJECTED Padına Avcı's lawyer, who appealed the decision of the Erzurum 3rd Heavy Penal Court, stated in his petition that his client's right to a fair trial was violated, the investigation was incomplete, the decision was unjustified, there was insufficient evidence for conviction, an acquittal should have been issued, and the degree of unjust provocation and favorable provisions should have been applied. The lawyer for the other defendant, Fahrullah Özdemir, stated in his petition that the investigation was incomplete, there was no intent to kill, the elements of the crime were not established, the conditions for applying self-defense or excessive force provisions were met, and the degree of unjust provocation and favorable provisions should have been applied.
NO CONTRADICTION FOUND IN THE VERDICTS In the reasoned decision of the Erzurum Regional Court of Justice 1st Criminal Chamber, which evaluated the defendants' lawyers' appeals, it was stated: "As it is understood that the procedures during the trial process were carried out in accordance with procedure and law, the claims and defenses put forward at the stages were shown and discussed together with the evidence collected and deemed sufficient according to the file content, the evidence relied upon and rejected was clearly shown, the conscientious opinion was based on definitive data in line with the documents and information in the file, the judicial reports relied upon were sufficient, there was no incomplete investigation, the defendants' right to a fair trial was not violated, it was accurately determined that the act against the victim was committed by the defendants acting together with unity of thought and action, there is no error in accepting the qualifications of the crimes matching the defendants' actions as 'intentional murder' and 'qualified intentional murder', the conditions for applying self-defense or excessive force provisions were not met, there is no error in the application of unjust provocation provisions and the determined reduction rates; since it is understood that there are no other favorable provisions applicable to the defendants, and the penal sanctions were determined within the legal framework and with reasons according to the opinion and discretion formed as a result of the trial, no illegality was found in the verdicts upon examination of the alleged appeal grounds."
COURT OF CASSATION UPHELD THE SENTENCES Thereupon, the defendant lawyers sent the file to the Court of Cassation for appeal. The 1st Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation, which examined the file, upheld the local court's decision. In its decision, the 1st Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation stated: "Since no illegality was found in the decision of the Erzurum Regional Court of Justice 1st Criminal Chamber as a result of the examination of the appeal grounds put forward by the defendant Padına's counsels and the defendant Fahrullah's counsel and the appeal review conducted, pursuant to Article 302/1 of Law No. 5271, in accordance with the opinion notice, it was decided unanimously to reject the appeal requests on the merits and uphold the verdicts, and to reject the release request of defendant Padına's counsels, considering the imposed sentence amount and the time spent in detention."