ANALISIS YURIDIS TERHADAP PEMERIKSAAN TINDAK PIDANA RINGAN MENURUT KUHAP DAN PERMA NO. 2 TAHUN 2012 (STUDI PUTUSAN NO. 590/PID.B/2019/PN SIM)

Kusumaningrum, Prinita Sekar (2025) ANALISIS YURIDIS TERHADAP PEMERIKSAAN TINDAK PIDANA RINGAN MENURUT KUHAP DAN PERMA NO. 2 TAHUN 2012 (STUDI PUTUSAN NO. 590/PID.B/2019/PN SIM). S1 thesis, Universitas Kristen Indonesia.

	Text (HalJudulAbstrakDaftarIsiDaftarGambarDaftarTabelLampiran) HalJudulAbstrakDaftarisiDaftarGambarDaftarTabelDaftarLampiran.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (2MB)
	Text (BABI) BABI.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (333kB)
	Text (BABII) BABII.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (440kB)
	Text (BABIII) BABIII.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (879kB)
	Text (BABIV) BABIV.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (340kB)
	Text (BABV) BABV.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (211kB)
	Text (DaftarPustaka) DaftarPustaka.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (238kB)

Abstract

Tindak pidana ringan, terutama pencurian ringan, sering menuai kritik masyarakat karena proses hukum dan ancaman pidananya dinilai tidak sebanding dengan nilai barang yang dicuri. Seperti dalam Putusan No. 590/Pid.B/2019/PN Sim, terdakwa Samirin mencuri getah karet senilai Rp17.480 (tujuh belas empat ratus delapan puluh rupiah) dan diperiksa dengan acara pemeriksaan biasa.Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangann (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). Data yang digunakan adalah data sekunder dengan bahan hukum primer: Kitab Hukum Acara Pidana, Peraturan Mahkamah Agung No.2 Tahun 2012, Putusan No.590/Pid.B/2019/PN Sim, sedangkan bahan hukum sekunder diperoleh dari jurnal ilmiah, buku hukum, dan juga pendapat ahli hukum, dan bahan hukum tersier berupa kamus, kemudian bahan hukum dikumpulkan untuk disusun dan juga dianalisis. Dari hasil penelitian ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa KUHAP dan PERMA No. 2 Tahun 2012 mengatur acara pemeriksaan tindak pidana ringan diproses melalui acara pemeriksaan cepat tanpa penahanan oleh Ketua Pengadilan, hal ini sudah sesuai dengan asas peradilan cepat, sederhana, dan biaya ringan. Namun, dalam putusan tersebut, hakim tidak mempertimbangkan nilai barang yang dicuri sebagai tindak pidana ringan, sehingga penerapan hukum formilnya menjadi tidak sesuai. Akibatnya, putusan tersebut mengandung cacat formil dan dapat dibatalkan./Minor criminal offenses, particularly petty theft, often receive public criticism because the legal process and penalties are considered disproportionate to the value of the stolen goods. For instance, in Decision No. 590/Pid.B/2019/PN Sim, the defendant, Samirin, stole rubber sap worth Rp17,480 (seventeen thousand four hundred eighty rupiah) and was tried through a regular trial procedure. This study employs a normative juridical approach, utilizing both a statute approach and a case approach. The data used is secondary data, including primary legal materials such as the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 of 2012, and Decision No. 590/Pid.B/2019/PN Sim. Secondary legal materials are derived from academic journals, legal textbooks, and expert opinions, while tertiary legal materials include dictionaries. These legal materials were collected, organized, and analyzed systematically. The findings of this research conclude that KUHAP and Supreme Court Regulation No. 2 of 2012 stipulate that the examination of minor offenses must be conducted through a fast-track procedure without detention by the presiding judge. This aligns with the principles of swift, simple, and low-cost justice. However, in the aforementioned decision, the judge failed to consider the stolen item's value as a factor qualifying it as a minor offense. Consequently, the formal legal application was inconsistent, rendering the decision legally flawed and subject to annulment.

Actions (login required)

View Item