Penyelesaian Perkara Pencurian dengan Dakwaan Subsidiaritas Di Pengadilan Negeri Bangko

Abstract

The aim of this research is to determine the arrangements for resolving criminal theft cases with subsidiarity charges. to determine criminal responsibility for theft with subsidiarity charges at the Bangko District Court. The method used in this research uses normative legal research methods using a conceptual approach. Results and discussion in this research In the case of theft committed by ZA, and in the article imposed on the defendant, namely Article 363 paragraph (1) 3rd and 5th of the Criminal Code, the defendant must be declared legally and convincingly proven guilty of committing a criminal act as in the indictment of the Primary Public Prosecutor. However, the decision contains an ambiguous meaning because in the subsidiary indictment Article 363 paragraphs (1) to (5) is also included in the primary indictment, meaning that the principle of subsidiarity in this case cannot be used, but in the indictment it should be a subsidiary indictment because the punishment provision is different from article 363 paragraph (1). Based on the elements related to the theft articles imposed on the defendant and based on the theories of punishment, the judge can decide the case in accordance with the provisions of the theft articles contained in the Criminal Code.