The Supreme Court clarified that not every socially approved act leads to the termination of a criminal case.

The accused may be exempted from criminal liability with the imposition of a judicial fine if he does not commit any socially approved actions, but only those in which the harm caused by a specific crime can be considered to be mitigated. This is mentioned in definition Supreme Court of Russia.

The Supreme Court heard a case of violation of traffic rules while driving, as a result of which a person died. On August 3, 2022, the Leninsky District Court of Cheboksary ruled that the criminal case under Part 3 of Art. 264 of the Criminal Code in relation to Sergey Yakovlev, who had no previous convictions, should be terminated on the basis of Art. 25.1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation with the appointment of a judicial fine in the amount of 40 thousand rubles. to state revenue. By an appeal decision of the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic of September 27, 2022, the decision was upheld.

However, Deputy Prosecutor General of Russia Igor Tkachev did not agree with the court decisions, considered them illegal and unfounded, and asked them to be cancelled. In the cassation submission, he indicated that, by releasing Sergei Yakovlev from criminal liability, the court of first instance formally approached this issue.

“The court did not take into account that the object of the criminal encroachment under Part 3 of Article 264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is not only the safety of traffic and the operation of vehicles, but also social relations that guarantee the inviolability of human life,” the protest of the Deputy Prosecutor General stated .

The Deputy Prosecutor General also claims that the material assistance provided to the sister of the deceased, as well as payments to a social organization, did not reduce the social danger of the deed. In addition, the representative of the supervisory authority draws attention to the fact that during the preliminary investigation the driver did not admit guilt and claimed that the deceased himself was the culprit of the incident. Igor Tkachev also stressed that after the decision was made to dismiss the criminal case, the driver again flagrantly violated the rules of the road twice, exceeding the speed limit.

The Supreme Court pointed out that when exempting from criminal liability a person who has committed a crime of small or medium gravity for the first time, it should be taken into account that, according to the meaning of the law, various criminally punishable acts entail the onset of harm of a different nature.

The Supreme Court also noted that the provisions of Art. 76.2 of the Criminal Code (Exemption from criminal liability with the appointment of a judicial fine), actions aimed at making amends for such harm and indicating a decrease in the degree of public danger of a crime cannot be the same in all cases. It is necessary to determine them depending on the characteristics of a particular situation. At the same time, the conclusion about the possibility or impossibility of such release must be substantiated by references to the actual circumstances examined at the court session.

“The possibility of releasing a person from criminal liability with the imposition of a judicial fine is associated with the commission of not any socially approved actions, but only those as a result of which the harm caused by a specific crime can be considered atoned,” explains the Supreme Court.

Thus, the Supreme Court ruled that when dismissing the criminal case against Sergei Yakovlev with the imposition of a judicial fine, the court of first instance proceeded from the fact that the driver is accused of committing a crime of medium gravity, is characterized positively, and is not registered with the narcologist and psychiatrist. In addition, he paid the victim 530 thousand rubles. and provided charitable assistance to the center for orphans in the amount of 10 thousand rubles.

“Meanwhile, the object of the criminal encroachment provided for by Part 3 of Art. 264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, is not only the safety of road traffic and the operation of vehicles, but also social relations that guarantee the inviolability of human life, ”the resolution says. As a result, the Judicial Board decided to send the case for a new trial to the district court.