A Bar Fight Where Both Sides Filed: how mutual injury files actually run

When you and the other man both go to hospital and both give statements, the prosecutor is holding two investigations: one in which you are the suspect and he is the complainant, and one in which the roles are reversed. The files are normally joined and heard by the same criminal court, but joining them does not merge the charges. Each accusation is decided on its own evidence.

Turkish law does contain a mutual-conduct rule, but only for insult. Under TCK 129/3, where both parties insulted each other, the court may reduce the sentence by up to one third or decline to punish either or both of them; under TCK 129/2, a person who insults in response to being injured receives no penalty at all. There is no equivalent for intentional injury under TCK 86. Two people can be convicted for the same thirty seconds.

Before anyone weighs whose account is more convincing, the forensic wording of the medical report has already decided the range you are in. The single phrase that matters is whether the injury is treatable by simple medical intervention — basit tıbbi müdahale ile giderilebilecek ölçüde hafif. A split lip normally falls inside it. A fractured nose or a broken finger does not.

Because TCK 86/2 is prosecuted only on complaint, the six-month limit in TCK 73/1 applies, and under TCK 73/2 that period runs from the day the complainant learned both the act and who committed it, provided the limitation period has not run out first. A withdrawal under TCK 73/4 ends a complaint-based case outright. None of that helps once the file has moved up an article.

TCK 6/1-f defines what counts as a weapon. Sub-paragraph 3 covers any cutting, piercing or bruising instrument made for attack or defence. Sub-paragraph 4 is the one that catches bar fights: any other object that is in fact suitable for use in attack or defence, even though it was not made for that purpose. A bottle, a glass, a bar stool, a belt wrapped round the hand — all of these have been treated as weapons.

If the court accepts that finding, TCK 86/3-e applies. Three things change at once, and none of them are within your control afterwards:

• The sentence rises by one half, and the article is expressly prosecuted without any complaint. The other side withdrawing no longer closes your file.
• Mediation closes. CMK 253/1-b-1 refers intentional injury to the mediation office excluding the third paragraph of TCK 86. A 86/3 file is not eligible.
• Remand becomes a listed ground. CMK 100/3-a-4 names TCK 86/3 sub-paragraphs (b), (e) and (f), and the whole of TCK 87, as offences where the existence of strong suspicion may itself be treated as a reason to remand.

One belief worth dropping early: alcohol is not mitigation. TCK 34/1 excuses a person who could not appreciate the meaning of the act because of a temporary cause or of alcohol taken against their will. TCK 34/2 then states plainly that this does not apply to someone who committed the offence under alcohol taken voluntarily.

Under CMK 91/1, police custody may not exceed twenty-four hours from the moment of apprehension, plus a further period of no more than twelve hours for transport to the nearest judge. Where the offence was committed collectively — which a fight involving several people can be — CMK 91/3 allows the prosecutor to extend custody by written order, one day at a time, for up to three days. CMK 91/4 adds a separate route for offences caught in the act: a police chief designated by the civil authority may order up to twenty-four hours, or up to forty-eight hours during collective disturbances, with intentional injury under TCK 86 and 87 expressly on that list; the person must be brought before a judge within forty-eight hours, or four days for collective offences.

Do not rely on the two-year rule. CMK 100/4 bars remand where the upper limit of the prison sentence does not exceed two years — but it carves out offences intentionally committed against bodily integrity. That carve-out covers TCK 86 in full, including the 86/2 range whose ceiling is one year six months. The practical checks are proportionality under CMK 100/1 and the grounds in CMK 100/2, which is where the position of a foreign suspect with no registered address in Türkiye is argued. What that argument looks like is set out in remand and judicial control, and the sequence from the police station to the judge in being arrested in Türkiye.

The realistic outcome for a first-time foreign suspect in a mid-range injury file is judicial control rather than remand. The condition that matters most to you is the first one on the list in CMK 109/3-a: a prohibition on leaving the country. It is imposed by the judge, and it stays until it is lifted.

Your statement at the station is taken through an interpreter appointed by the judge or the prosecutor, under CMK 202/3, whenever you do not speak Turkish well enough to express yourself. The wording of that first statement is what the whole file is later measured against, so read the notes on interpretation in Turkish criminal proceedings before you sign anything.

Self-defence (TCK 25/1). No penalty is imposed where the act was necessary to repel an unjust attack that is occurring, certain to occur, or certain to be repeated, and was proportionate to that attack according to the circumstances at that moment. Two words carry the weight: o anda — at that moment — and orantılı, proportionate. The defence usually fails not because the attack was doubted but because the response continued after the attack stopped. If you went beyond the limit out of excusable agitation, fear or panic, TCK 27/2 still removes the penalty entirely.

Provocation (TCK 29). Where the offence was committed under anger or severe distress caused by an unjust act, the sentence is reduced by between one quarter and three quarters. In mutual-injury files courts frequently apply it to both sides, which is why a case where each man is convicted and each receives a substantial reduction is a common ending.

Mediation (CMK 253). TCK 86 excluding the third paragraph, and TCK 88, are referred to the mediation office as a matter of obligation. You have seven days from the offer to answer, and silence counts as refusal (CMK 253/4). The mediator has thirty days to conclude, extendable twice by up to twenty days each (CMK 253/12). If agreement is reached and the undertaking is performed in one go, the prosecutor issues a decision not to prosecute (CMK 253/19). In a mutual file both directions have to settle, and under CMK 253/18 a failed mediation cannot be reopened.

Where none of these ends the case, sentence-level relief remains: suspension under TCK 51 for a sentence of two years or less, or deferral of the pronouncement under CMK 231/5, also capped at two years, now carrying a five-year supervision period under CMK 231/8 as amended on 16 July 2026. How these fit together across assault and public-order files generally — including the offences that often accompany a bar fight, such as threats and criminal damage — is covered on assault and public order charges in Türkiye.