Document from CIS Legislation database © 2003-2021 SojuzPravoInform LLC

On behalf of the Russian Federation

RESOLUTION OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION

of April 13, 2021 No. 13-P

On the case of check of constitutionality of Article 22, Item 2 parts one of Article 24, Article parts two 27, Article parts three 246, Article parts three 249, Item 2 of Article 254, Article 256 and part four of Article 321 of the Code of penal procedure of the Russian Federation in connection with the claim of the citizen A. I. Tikhomolova

Constitutional court of the Russian Federation as a part of the Chairman V. D. Zorkin, judges K. V. Aranovsky, G. A. Gadzhiyev, L. M. Zharkova, S. M. Kazantsev, S. D. Knyazev, A. N. Kokotov, L. O. Krasavchikova, S. P. Mavrin, N. V. Melnikov, Yu. D. Rudkin, V. G. Yaroslavtsev,

being guided by Article 125 (the part Item "and" 4) Constitutions of the Russian Federation, Item 3 parts one, parts three and the fourth Article 3, Article part one 21, Articles 36, 47.1, 74, 86, 96, 97 and 99 Federal constitutional Laws "About the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation",

considered in meeting without carrying out hearing case on check of constitutionality of Article 22, of Item 2 parts one of Article 24, of Article part two 27, of Article part three 246, of Article part three 249, of Item 2 of Article 254, of Article 256 and part four of article 321 Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.

Reason for consideration of the case was the claim of the citizen A. I. Tikhomolova. The basis to consideration of the case was the found uncertainty in question of whether there correspond the Constitutions of the Russian Federation disputed by the declarant of legislative provision.

Having heard the message of the judge-speaker N. V. Melnikov, having researched the submitted documents and other materials, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation

established:

1. The part three of the article 249 "Participation of the Victim" Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation determines that on criminal cases of private prosecution absence of the victim in court without valid excuse involves the termination of criminal case on the basis, stipulated in Item 2 parts one of its article 24 "The Refusal Bases in Initiation of Legal Proceedings or the Terminations of Criminal Case", i.e. behind absence in act of actus reus. According to Item 2 of the article 254 "The Termination of Criminal Case or Criminal Prosecution in Judicial Session" of this Code if the prosecutor refuses accusation according to part three of its Article 249, the court dismisses criminal case in judicial session. Part second of the article 27 "Bases of the Termination of Criminal Prosecution" of this Code does not oblige to consider objections of the criminal prosecution charged for the termination behind absence in act of actus reus.

Constitutionality of the given regulations among other provisions of this Code, namely Article 22, Article parts three 246, of Article 256 and part four of Article 321, is disputed by the citizen A. I. Tikhomolova whose criminal proceeding is resumed by the resolution of Presidium of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of December 26, 2018 in view of new circumstance - removal according to its claim of the Resolution of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation of October 15, 2018 No. 36-P; earlier made judgments are cancelled, case is sent for new judicial review. Criminal case on A. I. Tikhomolova's accusation in the crime provided by part one of the article 116 "Beating" UK of the Russian Federation is stopped by the resolution of the magistrate judge of September 20, 2019 behind absence in act of actus reus in connection with absence without valid excuse of the private prosecutor. Superior courts agreed with such decision (the appeal resolution of district court of February 11, 2020, cassation determination of the Second court of cassation of the general jurisdiction of September 8, 2020 and the judge's ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of November 26, 2020). At the same time courts did not consider deserving attention the declarant's arguments that in its case there is no event of crime and that proceeedings shall be continued up to the resolution of the verdict of not guilty.

Warning!!!

This is not a full text of document! Document shown in Demo mode!

If you have active License, please Login, or get License for Full Access.

With Full access you can get: full text of document, original text of document in Russian, attachments (if exist) and see History and Statistics of your work.

Get License for Full Access Now

Disclaimer! This text was translated by AI translator and is not a valid juridical document. No warranty. No claim. More info

Effectively work with search system

Database include more 50000 documents. You can find needed documents using search system. For effective work you can mix any on documents parameters: country, documents type, date range, teams or tags.
More about search system

Get help

If you cannot find the required document, or you do not know where to begin, go to Help section.

In this section, we’ve tried to describe in detail the features and capabilities of the system, as well as the most effective techniques for working with the database.

You also may open the section Frequently asked questions. This section provides answers to questions set by users.

Search engine created by SojuzPravoInform LLC. UI/UX design by Intelliants.