Constitutional Court: victims can protect their rights even if the criminal case is terminated

Advice from experienced lawyers → Trial → Closing a criminal case

Initiating a criminal case in no way means passing a sentence, but it is associated with certain investigative actions that are aimed at a specific result. Is it possible to close a criminal case before it reaches its logical conclusion?

The interest of many people under investigation in closing the criminal case is understandable. In addition, Russian legislation in some cases determines the conditions for terminating a criminal case.

So there is a chance that the criminal case will be closed before a verdict is passed. And the main assistant in this matter is an experienced lawyer who knows in what cases criminal cases are closed and knows how to operate with the possibilities of the law to represent the interests of his client.

In what cases is a criminal case closed?

Here are just a few options that involve terminating criminal proceedings.

Article 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. Under this article of the Criminal Procedure Code, you can close a case:

• if there is no event or corpus delicti;
• if the criminal case has expired;
• if the accused or suspect has died;
• in the absence of a statement from the injured party.

Article 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation indicates that a criminal case can be closed in connection with the fact of reconciliation of the parties (and with the consent of the prosecutor).

Article 27 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation indicates that:

• the case may be dismissed if it is proven that the accused or suspect is not involved in the crime committed;
• if a sentence in this case is already in effect against the suspect or accused or an amnesty act has entered into force.

Article 254 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation provides for the termination of a criminal case within the framework of a court hearing if the accusing party withdraws the accusation. If the case is of a private nature, then the failure of the victim to appear without a valid reason may become a reason for termination of the process.

The following reasons also contribute to the termination of a criminal case:

• if before the verdict came into force a new law was passed and it cancels the adopted decision, then the criminal case is closed;
• when the criminal prosecution of all suspects or accused is terminated, the entire process is terminated;
• the accused or suspect is a minor and cannot bear criminal liability;
• the accused or suspect has been diagnosed with a mental illness.

Many practicing proceduralists are convinced that the termination of a criminal case is tantamount to an unsuccessful or erroneous investigation. In other words, this is a defect in the work of the investigative department and the investigator in particular. It is quite natural to want to fight such trends that spoil the statistics on completed criminal cases. And this may be one of the reasons for complications when terminating a criminal case - even if the possibility for this is directly determined by law.

Can the investigator close the case before trial?

My name is Max. If it’s not difficult for you, please give me advice.

The situation is as follows: Spetsstroy LLC is carrying out road repair work in the Pervomaisky district of Rostov-on-Don. On May 16, 2003, a certain Countryman (this is his last name) - an employee of Spetsstroy LLC, driving a KAMAZ car, making a U-turn, hit a pedestrian L.I. Efremova. (this is my grandmother), who died on the spot from her injuries (he ran over her with his rear wheels).

There were no eyewitnesses who saw the entire incident. Some said that they saw that the car was standing, and then they saw the car driving back, and the woman was already lying dead.

About 10 days after the incident, two men came to our home - employees of Spetsstroy LLC and said that Countryman would like (he himself did not come) to make amends a little and pay a certain amount of money, that he is a good person, he has two children and so on. My mother, Efremova’s daughter, said that she couldn’t talk about any money right now and they said that they would call in a few days and left.

On June 2, the investigator from the traffic police, who is leading this case, called us and asked my mother to come to him on June 3 at 10 am. On the same day, June 2, in the evening, Countryman called and said that he was guilty, he was ready to be punished up to prison and would like to compensate for the damage and offered 50 thousand rubles. She and her mother agreed to meet on June 3 at 9 am near the traffic police. On June 3, we went to the traffic police, waited until 10 o’clock, Countryman never showed up. At 10 o'clock my mother went up to the investigator, he gave her a decree recognizing her as a victim, she gave evidence and the investigator said that if anything was needed, he would contact us.

About 2 weeks later, my mother again went to the investigator and wrote a statement of claim to him as part of a criminal case for compensation for moral and material damage.

On July 18, we received a letter from the traffic police, which said the following: the criminal case was closed because... there are two witnesses (one is an employee of Spetsstroy LLC, and the second is a passer-by, it is not clear where they came from) who saw that the car was making a U-turn, and Efremova was walking and she herself fell under the car between the cab and the body. And the forensic examination also confirms this. Thus, Countryman is not to blame for the accident. You can appeal this decision and file a civil lawsuit in the district court.

This is the situation. I have a few questions:

1. Within what period can one appeal a decision to terminate a criminal case?

2. Is it even possible to achieve the re-initiation of a criminal case, because we have suspicions that they either bought an investigator, or witnesses, or an examination?

3. Should a civil claim be filed against Zemlyak or against Spetsstroy LLC?

4. What amount does the court usually award for moral damages in such situations?

These are my questions, please answer if you can. Thank you in advance. Best regards, Maxim.

Assistance from a lawyer in closing a criminal case

Despite the fact that the legislation clearly indicates the reasons why criminal prosecution can be terminated, the desired result is not always possible to obtain in practice. Legal intricacies and a huge number of clauses and conventions can become a serious obstacle for a person who is not very knowledgeable in this area. In connection with a specific case, it is not always clear from the content of the articles of the law how long it will take and on what grounds it can be closed. Moreover, there are often situations when a person cannot understand whether it is actually closed.

The help of a professional lawyer is a real opportunity to make the articles of the law work on the procedure for closing a criminal case. The defender will not only collect all the necessary documents, but will also draw up petitions and requests in the form that will be effective in a particular situation. The lawyer will monitor the timing of the termination of the criminal case, and will also find out whether the criminal case is closed if its participants were not notified about this for some reason.

You can find out in advance how much it costs to close a criminal case from the criminal lawyer to whom you intend to entrust the solution to your problem. Prices for defense services are determined depending on the complexity of the case and the volume of work. But it is always possible to find a compromise that equally matches the expectations and capabilities of both parties.

Our lawyers will protect you at any stage of the case.

Call the hotline right now and sign up for a FREE consultation: +7 (812) 903-41-46 or a lawyer online.

How cases are delayed in court and how to resist it

1.06.18

M. Poluektov / AK Poluektova and partners

Many practicing lawyers are familiar with this situation: knowing in advance that the court dispute will be lost, the defendant sets his lawyer the task of delaying the consideration of the case as much as possible until the decision enters into legal force (i.e., until the appellate court makes a decision). If you can't win the case, then you need to buy time. During this gained time, the defendant can continue to derive any benefits (for example, use the plaintiff’s property), have time to withdraw assets, etc.

Sometimes the plaintiff himself unwittingly helps the defendant drag out the case. To negate this assistance, we advise plaintiffs:

• Work out the statement of claim more carefully so that the court does not leave it without action or so that it does not have to be clarified later. If the basis or subject of the claim changes, or the amount of the claim increases, the period for consideration of the case begins anew (clause 3 of Article 39 of the Code of Civil Procedure).
• All available evidence must be attached to the claim. Remember that the presentation of additional evidence may delay the consideration of the case. The defendant has the right to familiarize himself with the evidence in advance, and he will certainly exercise this right by filing a motion to postpone the consideration of the case.
• Timely and fully comply with the ruling on acceptance of the statement of claim for proceedings and other court rulings.
• As early as possible, carry out procedural actions that could not be foreseen at the stage of preparing the claim and which may delay the consideration of the case. Study them more carefully. This applies to various types of petitions and statements (about falsifying evidence, ordering an examination, calling witnesses, etc.).
• Do not forget to send copies of documents to the defendant in advance (if the case is being heard in an arbitration court) or submit them to the court for transfer to the defendant (if the case is being heard by a court of general jurisdiction).

Now let's look at what techniques defendants use to delay the consideration of the case and how to counter this.

1. Request for consideration of the case with the participation of arbitration assessors

The involvement of arbitration assessors is possible only in an arbitration court due to the particular complexity of the case and (or) the need to use special knowledge in the field of economics, finance, and management (Article 19 of the APC).

The defendant can file such a petition at the stage of preparing the case for trial, and in some cases, at the stage of trial.

If these conditions are not met, indicate this in your objections.

Claim that the defendant is abusing his or her due process. Ask the court to refuse this petition on the basis of clause 5 of Article 159 of the APC.

QUOTE: “The arbitration court has the right to refuse to satisfy an application or petition if they were not filed in a timely manner by a person participating in the case due to abuse of their procedural rights and are clearly aimed at disrupting the court session, delaying the trial, preventing the consideration of the case and the adoption of legal and a justified judicial act, except for the case if the applicant was not able to submit such an application or such a petition earlier for objective reasons” (clause 5 of Article 159 of the APC).

Do not try to appeal the court’s ruling to consider the case with the participation of arbitration assessors. Such determinations are not subject to appeal.

2. Petition to involve a co-defendant in the case

The defendant may file such a petition only if it is impossible to consider the case without the participation of another person as a defendant.

Moreover, after involving a co-defendant in the case, the case is considered from the very beginning (clause 8 of Article 46 of the APC), which naturally significantly delays the process.

The need to involve a co-defendant may arise in different situations. For example, if during the trial on a claim for the recovery of property from someone else’s illegal possession, the disputed property is leased by the defendant to another person.

To prevent such developments, take preventive measures. For example, ask the court to take interim measures in the form of seizure of the disputed property.

3. Application by a third party to intervene in the case

Third parties may intervene:

• with independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute (for example, a third party declares its rights to the disputed property) and
• without independent claims regarding the subject of the dispute, if a court decision may affect their rights or obligations in relation to one of the parties (for example, a subcontractor enters into a case based on a customer’s claim against the contractor to eliminate deficiencies in the work performed, or a subtenant enters into a case based on a landlord’s claim against to the tenant to terminate the lease agreement).

In order to delay the consideration of the case, the defendant may deliberately create a situation where a third party affiliated with him will file an application to intervene in the case after the start of the trial. In this case, the case will be considered from the very beginning (Articles 50, 51 of the APC).

It happens that to implement this plan, opponents use fictitious contracts (purchase and sale of disputed property, subcontracts, subleases, etc.).

In this case, the plaintiff must file an application for falsification of the presented contract in the hope that the other party, under threat of criminal liability, will exclude it from evidence in the case (Article 161 of the APC).

4. Request for consolidation of several cases into one proceeding

The court has the right to combine several similar cases in which the same persons are involved into one proceeding for joint consideration (Article 130 of the APC). After this, the case is reviewed from the very beginning and the process is delayed.

For example, a claim has been filed to collect a debt under a contract. In order to delay the consideration of the case, the defendant files a separate lawsuit in the same court to declare this agreement invalid on far-fetched grounds. After which he submits a motion to combine these two cases into one proceeding.

In this case, the plaintiff should object to the consolidation of cases, citing the fact that this will lead to excessive delay of the process in the first case (clause 4 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 23, 2009 N 57).

In addition, defendants often ask to consolidate cases that are not the same or do not involve the same individuals. Such requests cannot be granted by definition.

5. Counterclaim

At the last moment (before the decision is made), the defendant can file a counterclaim. If it is accepted by the court, the case will begin from the beginning.

The plaintiff should base his objections to accepting a counterclaim on the fact that:

• the conditions specified in clause 3 of Article 132 of the APC are not met;
• the mandatory pre-trial (claim) dispute resolution procedure was not observed (clause 5, article 4 of the Arbitration Procedure Code);
• the defendant is abusing his procedural right, since throughout the entire consideration of the case in court he did not take measures to file a counterclaim and did not provide arguments about the impossibility of filing it earlier; the counterclaim is aimed at delaying the consideration of the case (Resolution of the Court of Justice of the West Siberian District dated 30.08 .2017 in case No. A75-16706/2016).

6. Petition to obtain evidence from third parties

If the court grants such a request from the defendant, the consideration of the case will be postponed until the requested evidence is received.

Therefore, the plaintiff should pay attention to the following points:

• on the basis of which the defendant decided that this evidence is in the possession of a third party;
• what circumstances can be established by this evidence;
• whether these circumstances are significant for the case;
• whether the defendant really does not have the opportunity to independently obtain this evidence.

If any of these points are in doubt, the motion should be opposed.

7. Request to call witnesses

To delay the consideration of the case, the defendant may file a motion to call witnesses.

The plaintiff should ask questions: what facts can the witness confirm, what significance they have for the consideration of the case, how the witness learned about these facts and what relationship he has with the defendant. In addition, some circumstances cannot be proven by testimony. Depending on this, you should build your objections.

If the court nevertheless called a witness, but he did not appear, then the plaintiff should file a petition to consider the case in the absence of the witness, since otherwise the court will postpone the consideration of the case (clause 1 of Article 157 of the APC).

8. Request for an examination

An examination may be appointed to clarify issues that arise during the consideration of a case that require special knowledge. Very often, when ordering an examination, the court suspends the proceedings.

In his objections, the plaintiff may refer to the fact that the answers to the questions posed to the expert will not have legal significance for resolving the substance of the dispute and will only lead to a delay in the consideration of the case; that the defendant delayed for a long time in filing a petition to appoint an examination, and therefore is abusing his procedural rights.

9. Statement of falsification of evidence

The defendant can say that he or another person did not sign the document (or the document was drawn up “retroactively”) and declare that it was falsified (Article 161 of the Code of Civil Procedure) or forged (Article 186 of the Code of Civil Procedure).

In this case, the court will have to check the validity of this application. Why can the court order an examination?

In response, the plaintiff should refer to the fact that the reliability of the document can be established by comparing it with other documents available in the case. In this case, the courts do not order an examination.

10. Petition to suspend proceedings in the case

The defendant, a legal entity, can begin the reorganization procedure, the defendant, an individual, can “go to the hospital” or “go on a long business trip.” This gives the court the right to suspend the proceedings (Article 144 of the APC).

However, the plaintiff needs to know that this is a right and not an obligation of the court. In your objections, you should focus on the fact that the defendant is abusing his procedural rights in order to delay the process, that the defendant has a representative who can represent his interests in court.

11. Request for adjournment of trial

Typically, the defendant submits such a petition electronically and provides some “valid reasons” why he cannot appear in court (illness, etc.).

In response, the plaintiff may present the same arguments as in the previous paragraph.

Sometimes the defendant may use a trick - propose a settlement agreement, spend a long time agreeing on it with the plaintiff, and then not agree on it. If the plaintiff “falls for” this trick, then the court will definitely postpone the trial.

12. Appeal against court decisions in the appellate instance

The scheme here is as follows. The defendant (or a third party) files any obviously unfounded petition, the court of first instance refuses to satisfy it, the defendant files an appeal against the court’s ruling, after which the court of first instance postpones consideration of the case until the appeal is considered in the court of second instance.

This scheme can work with the following requests: to transfer the case to jurisdiction, to involve a co-defendant, to join a third party in the case, to combine cases into one proceeding, to separate claims into separate proceedings.

It is difficult to combat this, since the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation indicated that in such cases, arbitration courts should postpone consideration of the case until the consideration of the appeal against the ruling of the court of first instance (clause 6.1 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated May 28, 2009 N 36).

The court will also postpone or suspend consideration of the initial claim if an appeal is filed against the ruling to return the counterclaim.

13. Delaying the consideration of the case in the court of appeal

Suppose the court of first instance finally made a decision and satisfied the plaintiff’s demands.

But this decision has not yet come into force. To delay its entry into force, the defendant will file an appeal on the last day of the month. The complaint will be sent by regular mail so that it takes longer. The complaint will make mistakes, due to which the court will leave it without movement. The deficiencies in the complaint will be corrected on the last day.

This alone will delay the entry into force of the court decision.

Next, the defendant will use some of the techniques discussed above (as well as a number of others) to delay the consideration of the case in the appellate court.

If the case was heard in a court of general jurisdiction, then there are more opportunities to delay the consideration of the appeal.

The defendant may make it so that on the day of consideration of your appeal, it suddenly turns out that the court of first instance has received new appeals from other persons (these may be other persons participating in the case, or persons not participating in the case, but who believe that the court decision affected their rights and legitimate interests).

The further course of events is described in paragraph 19 of the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 19, 2012 N 13 “On the application by courts of the norms of civil procedural legislation governing proceedings in the court of appeal”:

— first, the appellate court will withdraw your appeal from consideration (postpone the hearing of the case) and return the case to the court of first instance;

- the court of first instance will appoint for consideration at the court hearing the issue of restoring the missed deadline for filing an appeal;

- a court hearing will take place, at which, suppose, the court will restore the missed deadline;

- after this, the court of first instance will “discover” that the content of the appeal does not meet the requirements for it or the state duty has not been paid and will leave it without movement, assigning the appellant a “reasonable period” to correct the shortcomings;

- on the last day of this “reasonable period” the appellant will send to the court by mail evidence of correction of the deficiencies in the complaint;

- the court of first instance will send copies of the complaint to the persons participating in the case to submit objections;

- and only after the deadline for filing objections has expired, the court of first instance will return the case to the appellate court.

How long will all this take, if only 2 weeks are usually allowed for the “mail run”?

As you can see, the unscrupulous party has a sufficient arsenal of means to delay the consideration of the case in court.

By law, an arbitration court must consider a case within 3 months, and a court of general jurisdiction – within 2 months. However, in practice, cases can take years to resolve. Moreover, it is the courts of general jurisdiction who “sin” the most.

Plaintiffs should take a more proactive approach to prevent delays in the case.

The court's attention should be focused on the fact that the defendant is abusing his procedural rights; refer to paragraph 5 of Article 159 of the APC as a legal basis for refusing to satisfy the defendant’s next request.

In addition to the above countermeasures, plaintiffs should more often resort to such a measure as a “statement to accelerate the case” (clause 7, article 6.1 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Arbitration Procedure Code). This application is considered by the chairman of the court and in some cases can be an effective tool.

If the judge is clearly dragging his feet, then it makes sense to file a complaint with the Qualification Board of Judges.

In this case, after consideration of the case, it will be possible to file an administrative claim for an award of compensation for violation of the right to legal proceedings within a reasonable time according to the rules of Chapter 26 of the CAS RF.

Cases from court practice

• Citizen Smirnov was accused of causing minor harm to the health of citizen Sidorov under article number 115 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. From the statement of the defense it became clear that these actions were due to self-defense. Citizen Sidorov was the first to use force, and Smirnov was forced to defend himself. Evidence and testimony of witnesses were the basis for dismissal of the criminal case.
• A criminal case was opened against the accused citizen Ivanov under article number 213 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation - hooliganism. According to the inquiry, he committed a violation of public order with the use of weapons. From the statement of the defense, the court learned that the accused did not have a weapon, and there were no signs of a violation of public order in his actions. All this was the reason for closing the case.

The statute of limitations has expired

A citizen is released from criminal liability if specific deadlines have expired from the date of commission of the criminal act:

• Two years for minor crimes.
• Six years for crimes of medium gravity.
• Ten years for serious crimes.
• Fifteen years for especially serious criminal acts.

It is worth noting that the Criminal Code provides a list of situations where statutes of limitations cannot be applied. A striking example is a criminal act against peace and humanity.

The statute of limitations begins to count from the moment the act was committed. This refers to cases in which the victim did not report the crime, and law enforcement agencies were not aware of it. If the offender is hiding from the police, then the statute of limitations does not apply.

The suspect may refuse to close the proceedings due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. Then things proceed according to the standard scheme. This allows a person who does not admit guilt to be rehabilitated.

Adviсe

If you find yourself the victim of a crime or, conversely, you have been charged with theft, the first thing you need to do is contact a professional lawyer for advice.

Many citizens suspected of crimes believe that if they are truly innocent, then they will not need the services of a lawyer. In fact, without the help of a specialist, it will be quite difficult to prove your non-involvement in the case. After all, when detained, a person is usually in a state of stress and can make a lot of mistakes, for example, signing a document without reading it.

First of all, you need to remember that you have the right:

• do not give any evidence against yourself;
• do not sign the protocol and other documents;
• do not provide evidence of your innocence, since proving guilt is the responsibility of law enforcement officers;
• use the help of a lawyer.

To protect yourself from arbitrariness and illegal accusations, you need to seek legal help as early as possible.

Accident by agreement

A certain Popov in the city of Langepas drove to the side of the road and rammed a car parked there, driven by a certain A. As a result, A. was seriously injured, and a criminal case was opened against Popov under Part 1 of Article 264 of the Criminal Code. Popov admitted his guilt in the accident and made every effort to reconcile with the victim. He even paid him 480 thousand rubles - this compensation was established by the victim himself. Ultimately, Popov managed to come to an agreement with the victim. As a result, the victim himself petitioned the investigation to terminate the criminal case against Popov precisely for the reconciliation of the parties. And investigators closed the case in June of the same year.

The indication that the decision to terminate the case in connection with the reconciliation of the parties is a right and not an obligation of the court, according to the Supreme Court, is illegal

However, the prosecutor's office returned him for further investigation. But not because there were no grounds for reconciliation. The prosecutor considered that not all circumstances to be proven had been established. In particular, the possibility of creating an obstacle in front of Popov, due to which he pulled onto the side of the road, has not been explored. This circumstance would have made Popov completely innocent of the accident.

In court, the victim again petitioned to release Popov. However, the court did not satisfy this petition and convicted Popov. The culprit of the accident was sentenced to 1 year and 4 months of restriction of freedom, with deprivation of rights for 1 year and 4 months imposed as an additional punishment.

At the same time, the court explained its refusal to apply conciliation by the fact that Popov had previously been brought to administrative responsibility for violating traffic rules, that Popov’s payment of 480,000 rubles to the victim was not full compensation for harm from the crime, and also indicated that what Popov had done encroaches on life and human health and on the safety of traffic and operation of transport and thereby creates an increased public danger for others.

The court of appeal agreed with the court of first instance, as well as the presidium of the court of the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous Okrug - Ugra.

But the Supreme Court disagreed. He indicated that, based on the provisions of Article 76 of the Criminal Code, release from criminal liability in connection with reconciliation with the victim is possible if the conditions specified in this article are met. One of these conditions is reconciliation between the person who committed the crime and the victim and making amends for the harm caused to him. And by making amends for harm we should understand compensation for damage, as well as other measures aimed at restoring the rights and legitimate interests of the victim violated as a result of the crime. In this case, the methods of making amends for the harm, as well as the amount of compensation, are determined by the victim.

Popov admitted guilt. It was the first time he committed a crime of minor gravity, and he fully compensated for the damage caused, determined by the victim. He also apologized. The victim stated that he had forgiven Popov, reconciled with him and did not want to bring him to criminal responsibility. Thus, all conditions for Popov's release have been met.

In response to the fact that Popov had previously been brought to administrative responsibility, the Supreme Court recalled that a person is considered subject to it for a year. At the time of the first court hearing, the statute of limitations had passed.

As for incomplete compensation - in particular, the court of first instance pointed to the state of health of the victim, requiring additional costs in the future exceeding the compensation paid - the Supreme Court recalled that the amount is determined by the victim at the time of making a procedural decision to terminate the criminal case.

And the indications of the courts of the first instance, as well as the cassation instance, that making a decision to terminate a criminal case in connection with reconciliation with the victim is a right and not an obligation of the court, in the opinion of the Supreme Court, were made without taking into account the requirements of legality, validity and fairness of the court decision.

Based on all this, the Supreme Court panel overturned the decisions of the lower courts and dismissed the case pending reconciliation of the parties. In general, if the culprit and the victim have truly reconciled, then the rest can only come to terms with it.

But it must be recalled that a few years ago it was proposed to exclude the possibility of reconciliation in a situation where the victim died in an accident. Indeed, in this case, it is not the victim who is reconciled, but his relatives. Who knows what kind of relationship they had?

The State Duma proposed banning the use of gadgets while driving:

Drawing up a refusal

The law does not contain clear requirements for the form of an application for reconciliation of the parties. However, within the meaning of the provisions of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, it must contain the following information:

• name of the judicial authority where the applicant applies;
• Full name, residential address, telephone number of the author of the petition, as well as status in the case: the victim or his representative;
• essence of the appeal: what the applicant is asking for (to terminate the criminal case on the grounds provided for in Article 25 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and Article 76 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation).
• justification for the petition - that is, a description of how exactly the guilty party made amends for the harm to the victim (the stolen item was returned, monetary compensation was paid, etc.). There must also be a record that the applicant has no claims against the defendant;
• number, signature.

Reasons for terminating criminal prosecution

To begin prosecution, a number of conditions must be met:

• Proven crime.
• Evidence of a person's involvement in the act.
• A statement was filed against the person from the injured party.

Article number 27 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation provides a number of grounds for closing records.

The reasons are as follows:

1. There is evidence that the person is not involved in the crime.
2. Evidence that a criminal act was not committed in the situation that gave rise to the case.
3. Lapse of time.
4. Death of a suspect.
5. The injured party did not file a petition regarding the commission of the crime.
6. The State Duma did not give permission to criminally prosecute the official.
7. Amnesty for a criminal.
8. The judge issued a verdict to refuse to open a criminal case or to terminate it.

There are cases when initiated criminal proceedings can be terminated:

1. Reconciliation of the parties. This is possible for acts of minor or moderate severity. This requires a statement from the injured party, as well as compensation for damages from the perpetrator of the crime.
2. Active repentance. This can be used in cases of minor acts. The main condition is that the person has not been prosecuted before and that he or she independently appears before the law enforcement agencies to repent. He also provided assistance in solving the crime.