- Статьи
- Auto
- Peace will not end: the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation did not recognize the settlement agreement with the driver
Peace will not end: the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation did not recognize the settlement agreement with the driver
An amicable settlement agreement with a driver whose fault caused an injury to a child cannot be concluded without taking into account the opinion of the minor himself. In addition, when deciding to dismiss a criminal case on the basis of a settlement agreement, the courts must take into account the circumstances of the accident committed by the accused, as well as his attitude to traffic rules, decided the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. Details - in the material "Izvestia".
Hit and run
In July 2023 in one of the villages of the Kemerovo region citizen Rybkina (surname changed. - "Izvestia") collided with a moving on the side of the road motoblock, which was driven by a 13-year-old girl. As a result of the accident, the teenager received several serious injuries, which were recognized as serious harm to health. The perpetrator of the accident fled the scene. She was found a week after the incident in another region. The investigative authorities opened a criminal case under part 2 of article 264 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation ("Violation of the rules of road traffic and operation of vehicles, resulting in negligent infliction of serious harm to human health"), the punishment for which is from three to seven years of imprisonment with deprivation of rights for up to three years.
However, in September 2023, the Kemerovo District Court dismissed the criminal case against Rybkina, as a settlement agreement was concluded between her and the injured party. Under this agreement, Rybkina paid 600 thousand rubles to the victims as compensation for moral damage. At the same time, since, in case of initiation of criminal proceedings on the fact of violation of traffic rules, administrative proceedings are automatically terminated by law, the motorist, who hit the child, was not actually responsible for her actions, having kept her driving license.
The ruling was also upheld by the appellate and cassation courts. Therefore, the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation sent a submission to the Supreme Court to cancel the decisions of lower courts against the driver Rybkina.
Prosecutor's Office against
In his submission, the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation draws attention to the fact that the district, appellate and cassation courts did not take into account the clarification of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of June 27, 2013 "On the application by the courts of the legislation governing the grounds and procedure for exemption from criminal liability", according to which, if the opinion of a minor on the approach of reconciliation of the parties in a criminal case does not coincide with the opinion of his legal representative, the termination of such a criminal case by amicable settlement is not allowed.
"The petition for termination of the criminal case for reconciliation of the parties is stated solely by the legal representative of the victim. In the materials of the criminal case there are no documents confirming the consent of the minor victim to the termination of the criminal case", - stated in the submission of the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.
The deputy prosecutor also drew attention to the fact that the motorist left the scene of the accident without providing assistance to the victim, trying to avoid responsibility, went to another region and even changed her appearance. Also, according to the prosecutor's office, Rybkina is a persistent violator of traffic rules: before the accident, she was brought to administrative responsibility 31 times for speeding and violation of requirements for transportation of children. The courts did not take into account these circumstances when considering the termination of the criminal case, noted in the supervisory agency.
"The decision taken by the court to terminate the criminal case excluded the possibility of considering the appointment of the guilty additional punishment in the form of deprivation of the right to drive a vehicle, which creates conditions for further violation of traffic safety rules by her," - said in the submission of the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.
The trial is underway
Having studied the case materials and the prosecutor's representation, the Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation recognized that the courts "committed violations of law that affected the outcome of the case, distorting the essence of justice and the meaning of the court decision."
The Supreme Court pointed out that the lower courts had failed to take into account the legal position of the Constitutional Court and the Plenum of the Supreme Court on the issues of exemption from criminal liability. The members of the judicial panel noted that the possibility of exemption from criminal liability and termination of a criminal case provided for in the legislation "means that [the court] must take the appropriate decision taking into account the totality of the circumstances of a particular case, including the degree of public danger of the act committed".
However, the courts did not find out the opinion of the minor victim about the possibility of reconciliation of the parties, the RF Supreme Court emphasized. It was also not fully taken into account that "the objects of criminal encroachment under Article 264 of the Criminal Code of the RF are public relations in the field of road safety and operation of vehicles, as well as human health and life". At the same time, the termination of the criminal case did not limit Rybkina's right to drive vehicles, the Supreme Court pointed out.
As a result, the Judicial Board for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation decided to satisfy the appeal of the Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, and the decisions of the lower courts - to cancel and send the case for a new consideration.
Punishment cannot be avoided
The decision of the Supreme Court is quite justified, said Sergei Radko, a lawyer for the Freedom of Choice movement.
- The driver, in fact, was not punished for his actions. With a high degree of probability, the court will take into account the position of the Supreme Court during the new consideration of the case. This will allow to bring the motorist to responsibility for her actions," the lawyer told "Izvestia".
According to Sergei Radko, it is unlikely that the court will sentence Rybkina to imprisonment. Given the fact that she has no previous convictions and has three dependent children, the judges are likely to limit themselves to a suspended sentence. But the deprivation of her rights for three years, taking into account the current practice is quite realistic, says the lawyer.
Where did the child come from on the road?
The courts that considered the case, approached their duties formally and did not take into account the position of higher instances, agrees Vice President of the National Automobile Union Anton Shaparin. At the same time, they did not give any legal assessment of the actions of the girl's parents, which became an indirect cause of the accident, he emphasized.
- What was the motoblock, which is an agricultural machinery, doing on the road? Why was it driven by a child? It is obvious that the girl, who suffered in the accident, was driving this "mini-tractor" with the tacit consent or connivance of her parents. At the same time, apparently, they did not bear any responsibility for this, but only became the party that concluded a settlement agreement with the motorist, who grossly violated traffic rules and seriously injured their child," Anton Shaparin told Izvestia.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
