In fact, many courts still hear cases where the victim is then the defendant in a court session. Unnecessary separation of the case leads to a prolongation of the case settlement time, affecting the rights and obligations of the victim, defendant and related persons.
The 2003 Criminal Procedure Code has provided for the separation of criminal cases for investigation. However, the practical application of local laws shows that the current provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code are still not specific. Thereby, leading to the interpretation and application of the law by local judicial authorities with different views.
In 2015, at Mr. S’s family, in district V, province P, a group of young people including: S, M, L and C were drinking and eating rice, when B came to play, then B stayed and drank with him. everyone. While drinking, because they drank a lot before, M and C went to the next room to rest, the rest of the group continued to drink, at this time L invited B to have a drink but B refused, so between L and B have conflicts, quarrels. L went down to S’s kitchen to get a 30 cm long knife, then walked up to B and used his right hand to slash at B but was stopped by C, L pushed everyone away and continued to slash 01 Smashed towards B, from the top down, B immediately raised his left hand to support it, so the blade hit the outer edge of his left hand (next to the little finger), causing injury to the pinky tissue of his left hand on the ulna, broken. left hand five knuckle background.
Due to being cut, B got up to fight L but was hit by C with his legs and arms, but did not cause any injuries. Seeing that the wound was bleeding a lot, B ran home about 300m away and met V (B’s brother). B told V that he had just been beaten and slashed at S’s house. Because he was angry that his brother was beaten and injured, V went to V’s bedroom to get an 85cm long sword, then went to S, B’s house. run after. At this moment at S’s house, the people in the party are gathering in front of the gate. Fearing that B would come back to take revenge, C used his motorbike to take L with him and leave. When I got to the gate of S’s house, I met V coming. V raised his sword and said: “Who just cut my brother”, seeing that C drove a motorbike carrying L and ran away. V holding the sword in his left hand chased after him, seeing that, Mr. M ran to hug V to prevent V from chasing. Due to being held back, V pulled himself up and pushed M away, then swung his sword up and slashed M’s left elbow, breaking his left arm bone. At this time, because everyone rushed to intervene, V did not cut M.
For Mr. M, after being cut by V, everyone took him down to S’s house to bandage the wound. At this time, B went to S’s house and saw everyone standing around M, mistakenly thinking it was L, who had just cut him, so B took a knife, stood from behind, and slashed 1 time on the head and back of his neck. M. Then B left the knife at S’s house and ran out.
The above case has been prosecuted by the Criminal Investigation Agency and prosecuted against V, B and L for the crime of “Intentionally causing injury” according to the provisions of Clause 2, Article 104 of the Penal Code. During the investigation process, the civil compensation issue has been agreed by the parties. Regarding the criminal behavior of the accused is clear, but on the application of the provisions of law to solve the case, there are two different views:
The first opinion is that: These are two cases of intentional injury that are independent of each other. The first case was L causing injury to B and ended when B ran away from home about 300m away from the crime scene. The second case is B and V causing injury to M. Therefore, it is necessary to separate L’s act of causing injury to B into an independent case, because in this case B has both the status of a victim and also an independent case. If they have the status of defendants, settling in the same case will be very difficult to determine their procedural status, leading to serious infringement of their legitimate rights and interests.
The second opinion is that: It is not necessary to separate but handle them together in a case, because: The acts of the accused are related to each other and occur continuously in a short period of time; Joint handling in a case will help the procedure-conducting agency easily assess the nature and level of each person’s behavior, thereby making a more accurate judgment. At the same time, the current Criminal Procedure Code and its guiding documents do not contain any provisions prohibiting the handling of a person who is both the accused and the victim in the same case that cannot be tried once. The civil compensation issue has been resolved, and neither party has any other request.
Source: According to kiemsat.vn
For support and advice on Business, Intellectual Property, Litigation, etc. in the best way, please contact us with the following information:
Law Firm Address: L4-09.OT06 Landmark 4 Building Vinhomes Central Park, 720A Dien Bien Phu, Ward 22, Binh Thanh District, Ho Chi Minh CityHotline: 0986.938.627Zalo, Viber, Line: 0986.938.627Facebook: facebook .com/DHPLAW