Termination of a criminal case due to reconciliation of the parties: statement, resolution

What does reconciliation of the parties mean: examples from practice

First of all, let's understand the terminology. “Reconciliation of the parties” does not mean at all that these same parties directly reconciled, became friends and the victim forgave the defendant everything. No! This only means that one side is satisfied with some kind of smoothing compensation from the other.

The victim may not forgive the offender on a human level, but may not have legal claims against him. Then the court can make a decision to terminate the case for reconciliation of the parties. Or maybe I won’t be able to bear it.

To illustrate the above, here is an example:

Victim P, from whom accused S (who was previously her partner) stole 6,000 rubles, filed a petition at the court hearing for reconciliation with him. Due to the fact that not only was the stolen property returned to her in full, but she was also paid compensation for the “suffering” caused in the amount of 4,000 rubles. The woman stated that although she hates the offender and no longer wants to know him, she does not want long legal proceedings; compensation for the harm caused is quite enough for her. And the court dismissed the case for reconciliation of the parties.

By the way, such an outcome is possible not only during a court hearing, but also at any stage of criminal proceedings (according to Article 25 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and 76 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). However, interrogators and investigators are not too fond of stopping such cases . What is important to them is positive statistics and the subsequent “exit” to court. Although many of them explain to both the accused and the victims (those who are committed to an amicable outcome) the possibility of petitioning the court for reconciliation of the parties.

True, not everyone is satisfied with such explanations. Some are appealing the refusal decisions of law enforcement officials on petitions for pre-trial termination of cases for reconciliation of the parties. However, by the time such complaints are considered, cases still end up in court, where they are closed at the very first hearing upon the victims’ request for reconciliation.

So it makes sense to complain only at the very beginning after the initiation of a criminal case. For some, it is important that the case does not go to court, especially when it comes to family conflicts.

As an example, we can take the case of the Ivanov spouses regarding the infliction of moderate harm to the health (as a result of beating) of the wife by the husband. The wife wrote a statement to the police, which she, having “cooled down” after a couple of days, wanted to take away. The investigator who opened the criminal case refused to close it pending reconciliation of the parties, motivating his decision by the rather serious consequences of the beatings, and also by the fact that the law gives the right to terminate the case on such grounds, but this is not his responsibility.

The couple appealed the refusal, but the criminal case has already gone to court. At the very first meeting, the wife petitioned to dismiss the case for reconciliation of the parties, noting that the husband had completely made amends to her. The court granted the petition, and the proceedings on the complaint against the investigator were terminated, since no decision was required.

Grounds for termination of a criminal case

The grounds on which a criminal case and criminal prosecution can be terminated are reflected in Art. 212 Code of Criminal Procedure. Under the same article, a refusal to initiate a case is issued based on the results of a preliminary inspection.

Absence of a fact (event) of a criminal act

If during the investigative actions it turns out that the information about the act was unreliable, since, for example, a murder did not take place. Or there is no reason to believe that it took place. Termination under this article is also carried out in the case where the event did occur, but there cannot be a guilty person. For example, if death occurred as a result of being struck by lightning.

Absence of corpus delicti in the committed actions

Criminal proceedings are terminated due to the absence of corpus delicti if not all elements of the corpus delicti are present.

The composition of a criminal act includes 4 mandatory elements: the object and the objective side, the subject and the subjective side. If at least one of them is missing, then we can talk about the absence of a crime. For example, if the perpetrator of the theft is a minor, then there is no subject. If the destruction of someone else's property did not lead to significant damage, then there is no objective side.

If a criminal case was initiated on suspicion of fraud, since the suspected person was selling counterfeit jewelry, then in the absence of victims (violation of property rights), we can say that there is no object of the crime.

The subjective side is understood as criminal intent or negligence. For example, if the person selling counterfeit jewelry did not know about it, then we can talk about the absence of a subjective side. Any of us may have counterfeit banknotes in our hands, but not everyone can determine the authenticity, even if the signs of counterfeiting are obvious to a healthy person with good eyesight.

This category (lack of corpus delicti) includes a wide group of acts.

Minor actions

First of all, this group includes actions that do not pose a public danger. For example, stealing 1 small coin. Here, formally, all the signs of a crime are present, but most often the harm is so insignificant that it is too cruel to prosecute for it under a serious crime. This does not mean that a person cannot be held liable under another article, for example administrative. So, if ten rubles were stolen from an elderly person as a joke, then there are grounds for prosecution for actions of a hooligan nature.

In qualifying the actions of the accused under this article, motive is of great importance. For example, the theft of an inexpensive cigarette case by a fan of a great tenor is in itself insignificant. Charges of theft are out of the question. But if these actions were accompanied, say, by entering the dressing room, where, as the “fan” expected, there would be more expensive things, then there are grounds for charges of attempted theft.

The action is no longer punishable

Under this paragraph of the article, termination is most often carried out when it comes to financial and economic activities. For example, in the USSR, trading in foreign currency was a serious crime. But time passed, and these actions ceased not only to be punished, but also to be condemned in society. Now it is as natural as buying real estate and cars.

If a person does not agree with the termination of the investigation, because in his eyes this accusation is shameful, then he can insist on completing the investigation. He has this right. The investigation will continue at the request of the accused. The final decision on guilt or innocence will be made by the court.

Actions were necessary in certain circumstances

Aggressive actions for the greater good, when they are truly necessary, are not punished by law, but require careful investigation. An example is self-defense. A person has the right to defend himself. However, it is first necessary to establish whether the person has not exceeded the necessary (required for self-defense) self-defense.

If the action is aggressive, was necessary, but excessive, then criminal proceedings may be initiated. Thus, the use of firearms available at home may be justified if the offender also came with a weapon, does not respond to warnings and behaves aggressively. However, a shot in the head, and not, say, in the leg, must have good reasons.

This category also includes causing harm by a law enforcement officer when detaining a criminal, acting under duress, or executing an order.

From this list, special attention should be paid to two paragraphs of Art. 8 of the Criminal Code: justified risk on the way to a socially useful goal and extreme necessity. In the first case, a person takes risks in order to avoid danger. It is not always directly present. But there must be a possibility. For example, when testing a new type of fighter, a pilot may harm someone else's property by landing the plane on it.

A car breakdown poses a threat to the life of the pilot and surrounding residents. However, the malfunction does not have to be such that there is a threat of loss of life. The extreme necessity is to act in conditions of direct threat, for example, when the plane is already falling.

Failure of an accused to appear in a private prosecution case

If the victim has applied to law enforcement agencies with a request for assistance in collecting evidence under an article that relates to a private prosecution, as well as with a lawsuit in court, then certain responsibilities are imposed on the victim. He must be present in court. The failure of the injured person to appear entails the termination of the criminal case (Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). The exception is when the plaintiff has valid reasons. This norm is prescribed in Art. 249 Code of Criminal Procedure.

Expiration of statute of limitations

If during a period of time equal to the statute of limitations under this article, the guilty person has not been brought to justice, then the case must be dismissed. But the accused person may resist termination if he wants to restore in the eyes of others the reputation that has suffered as a result of suspicion of a crime. In this case, the investigative authorities and the court are obliged to complete the case.

Termination of a case due to the expiration of the statute of limitations within the time limits established by law is possible only if the accused person did not interfere with the conduct of investigative actions. If the suspect is hiding from the investigative authorities and the court, then the statute of limitations is extended until he turns himself in. Or until the day he is forcibly detained.

In relation to persons who have committed crimes under serious articles providing for life imprisonment, only a court can terminate the case due to the expiration of the statute of limitations. In this case, termination of the criminal case by the prosecutor or investigative authorities is impossible.

Due to the death of the person responsible

If the person who committed the crime died during the investigation or trial, then the criminal case against him must be terminated. Criminal prosecution must also be stopped.

The exception is when it is necessary to rehabilitate someone who has passed away. In this case, the investigation and judicial review will continue until an objective decision is made.

Lack of judicial opinion

When certain senior officials, such as the prosecutor general or the head of the investigative committee, are accused of committing a crime, a special procedure applies. If there is no positive conclusion of the court / consent of the parliament / Constitutional Court / panel of judges, then the law provides for the termination of proceedings.

In connection with the reconciliation of the parties

When committing a crime of no more than average gravity, the guilty person may be released from liability. Necessary conditions for this:

Reconciliation of the parties (accused and victim with each other).
No criminal record.
Compensation for harm caused or taking other actions to make amends.

Termination of the case in court

If the accused has committed a minor crime for the first time, the judicial authority has the right to terminate the criminal case with the imposition of penalties.

Compensation for harm is also an indispensable condition. However, it is allowed for the guilty person to make amends for his guilt in another way.

Active repentance as a basis

The court, as well as investigative bodies, have the right to terminate criminal proceedings under an article of no more than average gravity if the person:

Committed a crime for the first time (has not previously been prosecuted).
She repented and confessed (exclusively voluntarily).
Assisted in the investigation.
Compensated for the damage.
Changed behavior and stopped causing harm to society.

All of the above points must be completed simultaneously.

If a more serious crime has been committed, then termination on the basis of repentance is not always possible, but only in cases where the act relates to one of the articles of the “Special Part” of the Criminal Code.

Due to repentance, a person is released from liability under certain conditions. So, if, after being released on these grounds, the perpetrator commits a crime again, he will be held accountable. However, there are two views on this matter in the expert community.

Some experts say that a more severe measure in case of a repeat crime should take place if the statute of limitations under the previous article has not expired. While other interpreters argue that in case of a repeated violation, release under this article is impossible, and this does not depend on the time the act was committed. Unfortunately, modern Russian law has many unclear places that are interpreted ambiguously, which gives rise to many problems.

Crimes of an economic nature

If, as a result of criminal actions, damage is caused to the budget of the Russian Federation, then full fulfillment of one’s financial obligations, including fines and penalties, is sufficient grounds for termination of the case and prosecution.

Committing a crime by a person with diplomatic status

If a person suspected of committing a criminal offense has diplomatic immunity, then the case by law must be terminated under Art. 3 of the same code.

Possibility of rehabilitation

All of the above reasons can be divided into two groups:

Rehabilitative grounds:

acquittal by court verdict;
termination of prosecution due to refusal of charges by the prosecutor's office;
closure of the case due to the absence of a criminal act;
due to the non-involvement of a particular person in the crime for which the case was initiated;
absence of crime event;
absence of a statement from the victim;
lack of judicial opinion in cases against senior officials of the law enforcement system.

Non-rehabilitative grounds:

amnesty;
minor age;
the expiration of the statute of limitations, if we are not talking about a deceased accused;
reconciliation of the parties.

The right to rehabilitation gives the accused the opportunity not only to justify himself to society, but also to receive compensation for the harm caused. The state is obliged to pay compensation. The guilt of the investigative authorities and the judicial system in this case does not matter. Mistakes by government officials give rise to the right to receive harm. The reason why they arose does not affect the ability to be rehabilitated and receive compensation.

Who can declare reconciliation?

According to the law, only the injured party can apply for reconciliation. And in the corresponding statement, she will need to indicate how the culprit made amends for the harm, how much compensation was paid, whether an apology was made, etc. Then everything is simple - the inquirer, investigator or court quite easily makes a “conciliatory” decision. However, in reality there are some complicating nuances:

Presence of dead. For example, a car accident in which someone died. Then, according to criminal procedural rules, representatives of the victim - his spouse, parents, children or other close relatives - participate in the case. The victim's representative actually has the same rights as the victim (if he remained alive). But the application of the victim’s representative for reconciliation of the parties in this case may not be satisfied, even if a significant amount is paid as compensation for damage.

Example No. 1: At a pedestrian crossing, defendant A hit and killed a minor girl. The mother of the child, recognized as the representative of the victim, during the court hearing filed a motion for reconciliation of the parties, indicating that the defendant paid her a million rubles, thereby making amends. However, the girl’s father, who is divorced from her mother, who was questioned at the trial, stated that his ex-wife, who has many unpaid loan obligations, wants to solve her own financial problems in this way. The court refused reconciliation, the appeals were not satisfied, and a guilty verdict was issued in the case with punishment imposed. Important: in a similar situation, a completely different decision could have been made. Much depends on the region where the problem is being solved, the personal opinion of a particular judge (who, like many people, may consider it unimportant where the mother spends the compensation money), etc. However, it should be borne in mind that the court is always much more biased towards the representative of the victim than to the victim himself , and his position is viewed literally “under a microscope.”
Violence was used against a police officer. Example No. 2: during the arrest of a certain N on an administrative case, the latter resisted the police: he pushed one of them, he fell and injured his leg. A criminal case was opened on this fact (Article 318 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), since a representative of the authorities (policeman) received injuries, although not dangerous to his life and health. At the trial, N stated that he and the policeman had reconciled because he (the defendant) had made amends and paid the government official some monetary compensation. However, the court refused to dismiss the case for reconciliation, since compensation for damage to a police officer personally does not mean compensation for damage caused to the authorities, of which this police officer is a representative. It is impossible to “reconcile” with the state, therefore there can be no talk of any termination of the criminal case. It is important: today decisions on reconciliation with government officials are actually not made, whereas 10 years ago this was possible in the courts.
If the representatives of the victim are social services . This happens when a crime is committed against a child left without parental care (an orphanage resident) or an old person in a nursing home. Or the low-income injured citizen had no relatives. Applications for reconciliation with defendants from social service workers are extremely rarely granted, since an outsider is unlikely to be able to understand and appreciate the depth of suffering of an unfamiliar victim, and therefore cannot be objective in determining the amount of compensation.

Grounds and procedure for filing a request for reconciliation

Before drawing up a petition, it is worth remembering the grounds for legal reconciliation:

The perpetrator cannot have a previous conviction at the time of committing the crime. Since “preferential” reconciliation of the parties is possible by law only for those who really stumbled for the first time. Important: a person is considered unconvicted until a court conviction against him has entered into legal force. This means that reconciliation is also possible for a second crime, if there is no legal verdict yet for the first. Example: Someone P is accused of two thefts, which he committed on November 30, 2022 and December 1, 2022. The first theft is currently under investigation, since the accused does not admit his guilt, does not compensate for the damage, etc. But for the second episode the case was sent to court, because there R admitted everything, repented, asked for an apology from the victim and compensated him for the damage caused in full. In this regard, at the court hearing the victim petitioned for reconciliation of the parties. The court granted the request, closing the case. And this despite the fact that the defendant is accused of one more episode of theft. After all, a court verdict has not yet been issued against him (and, accordingly, has not entered into legal force). In essence, to be “involved for the first time” means not to have a lawful conviction in the process of considering a specific case in which reconciliation of the parties is possible. This is what the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation says.
The criminal case should not be classified as “grave”, and especially “especially grave”. The possible sentence in such cases should not exceed 5 years. Only then is reconciliation possible. But is it possible to reconcile in a criminal case where the sanction does not imply imprisonment at all? It turns out that it is possible. Example: the accused under Article 118 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (which does not provide for real imprisonment as a punishment, but only a fine, correctional or compulsory labor) K caused serious harm to the health of A. After which he made amends by compensating for the damage and paying decent compensation. Victim A sent a petition to the court for reconciliation of the parties, which was granted after consideration of the case materials.
Compensation for damage to the victim at the time of filing a conciliation petition must be complete . Partial options or promises of future compensation are not permitted. At the time of consideration of the case in court or the adoption of an appropriate decision by law enforcement agencies, the money must be transferred by the accused/defendant to the victim. Example: someone Ch committed a robbery against L - he snatched her purse from her hands and disappeared. Even before his arrest, Ch sold the bag and its contents to unidentified persons, and spent the money in the wallet for his own needs. Afterwards, the accused fully admitted his guilt and expressed a desire to compensate L for damages in full. But not now, since he doesn’t have the money at the moment, but within 2 months after he gets a job. During the court hearing, L filed a petition for reconciliation of the parties, justifying it with Ch’s desire to compensate her for the damage caused. However, the court rejected the request, citing the impossibility of using the obligation to pay damages as a legal basis for terminating the criminal case. As a result, Ch was convicted and sentenced. Important: compensation for damage caused in money may differ from the amount of damage actually incurred. Both up and down. The main thing is that compensation must completely satisfy the victim.
And sometimes the victim does not need monetary compensation at all; an apology from the offender is enough for him. Example one: someone T illegally took possession of P’s valuables. After which P demanded his property by force. As a result of R’s arbitrariness, victim T suffered damage estimated at 30,000 rubles. However, during the trial, the victim petitioned for reconciliation of the parties, stating that he and the defendant had made mutual apologies to each other, which he considered sufficient for himself and making amends for the damage caused to him. The court agreed with T's arguments and granted the latter's request, ending the criminal prosecution against R in this case. Example two: Victim K, who suffered serious harm to her health, resulting in hearing loss in one ear, filed a claim in court for compensation for damages in an amount much greater than what the treatment cost her. She stated that as a result of the injury she had lost a good job and needed good rehabilitation. The defendant, whose actions were regarded by the investigation as careless, did not agree with K’s excessive (from his point of view) monetary demands. As a result, the criminal case was not dismissed in court and reached a verdict. Important: if the defendant is taken into custody, relatives or other persons can compensate for the damage caused by his crime. This is not prohibited by law, and reconciliation of the parties in court can take place.
Admission of guilt by the defendant is not necessary for reconciliation of the parties . However, compensation for damage as an indispensable condition is not consistent with this position. Therefore, it is assumed a priori that the offender admitted his guilt and repented.
The petition for reconciliation must be drawn up by the victim in writing.

How to write a statement of reconciliation?

The law does not have strict requirements for the form of a request for reconciliation. But, according to the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation and the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, it must certainly contain:

name of the court (or investigative body) to which the petition was sent;
exact information about the applicant (full name, address, telephone number, status on the case);
essence (what exactly is being asked for - termination of criminal prosecution on the grounds specified in Article 25 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation and 76 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation);
justification for this petition (how the damage was compensated, in what amount the damage was compensated, etc.);
filing date, personal signature with transcript.

Sample application for reconciliation of the parties.

Is it possible to withdraw a statement from the police after filing it about theft if a case has been opened?

If a complaint is made to the police, it will remain there.

At the same time, the applicant has the right to submit a second application to waive the first. However, this measure does not guarantee a successful resolution of the issue: criminal and criminal procedural legislation is aimed at protecting not only the private interests of specific people, but also general, public security. Therefore, having received a statement about a crime, in most cases, the police no longer act in the interests of the applicant, but in the general interest, and therefore they cannot stop the investigation at the will of the applicant.

All crimes provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation are divided into three groups:

Private charges include battery, minor bodily harm and slander. Such cases are initiated at the request of the victim, and if the applicant refuses his claims, they are terminated. These crimes and their investigation are indeed completely subject to the will of the victim.
Private-public accusations, for example, rape or various types of fraud: the investigation in such cases is also initiated by the victim with his statement, but the victim can no longer terminate the case by filing a refusal - it will be investigated, and termination is possible on the grounds provided for by the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation.
Public prosecution, including the absolute majority of crimes provided for by the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Theft, provided for in Article 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is also a crime of public prosecution. To initiate a criminal case for a crime of public prosecution, even a statement is not necessary - information about the crime can be obtained from any sources, and, moreover, the refusal of the victim to state the statement is not grounds for the immediate termination of criminal prosecution.

Note!
Filing a report of theft is a serious, responsible, legally significant step that starts the criminal investigation process. It is no longer possible to stop this process by the simple will of the victim.

Before submitting an application, or insisting on its reception by the police, you should make sure several times that the assumption regarding the crime committed is correct, that the applicant has not lost the allegedly stolen item, and even more so that his assumption regarding the identity of the alleged criminal is correct.

Judicial procedure: reconciliation in court

It is worth noting a number of aspects concerning the actual procedure for the reconciliation procedure in court:

The victim submits a petition for reconciliation directly to the judge, briefly stating the content of his petition. This can be done at any stage of the legal process. However, a decision is made only after the court carefully studies all the materials in the case.
The court certainly asks all participants in the process about the possibility of applying Article 25 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. And the defendant too . Sometimes he (the accused, the defendant) may be against it, since such a basis for terminating a criminal case is not rehabilitative. The person will be considered criminally liable for the rest of his life, and the corresponding mark will remain in the IDB of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. In addition, it will not be possible to raise the issue of unlawful persecution and demand compensation, as is the case if a person is acquitted by a court. Important: if the defendant is against it, the court always refuses to reconcile the parties.
The opinions of the participants in the process, although heard, are not binding on the court. Even if the state prosecutor is against it, the court can make a positive conciliatory decision. But the opposite situation may also occur: all participants are in favor, but the court refuses to reconcile the parties. Since making a decision on reconciliation is its (the court’s) right, and not its obligation (with the exception of cases of private prosecution, where the opinion of the victim (beaten, insulted, etc.) is mandatory for the court).
The defendant agrees to reconciliation in writing, in a special statement, which certainly indicates his awareness of the consequences of such a termination of criminal prosecution.
If the victim does not want to participate in the trial, but is not against reconciliation, he can send a petition by mail. But here you need to keep in mind that all requests are considered individually. And if the case materials do not reflect that the damage has actually been compensated, the application may be rejected.
Like any court decision, a decision to satisfy a request for reconciliation of the parties (or a refusal) can be appealed in the manner prescribed by law by any of the participants in the process (the defendant, his defense attorney, the prosecutor, the victim) within 10 days.

№ 3:

After receiving these documents, if the criminal case is still at the stage of preliminary investigation, it is necessary to submit a petition to the investigator (inquiry officer) with a request to terminate the criminal case in connection with the reconciliation of the parties. The received statement from the injured party should be added to the case materials. If the application is denied, you can appeal such refusal to the head of the investigative body, the prosecutor or the court, or re-apply it directly when the case is considered in court.