Tinjauan Yuridis Putusan Hakim Tentang Pencurian dengan Ancaman Kekerasan dalam Keadaan yang Memberatkan Ditinjau dari Ketepatan Pertimbangan Yuridis Hakim (Studi Putusan Nomor 342/Pid.B/2023/PN Mlg)

This research aims to examine the judge’s legal considerations in delivering a verdict in the criminal case of robbery with violence as reflected in Decision No. 342/Pid.B/2023/PN Mlg, as well as to analyze the relevance of the verdict based on the theories of justice and utility in criminal law. The defendant in this case was legally proven to have committed robbery with violence during the night, using a sharp weapon, and threatening the victim inside a private residence—an act that fulfills the elements of Article 365 paragraph (2) point 1 of the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP), which carries a maximum sentence of twelve years’ imprisonment. However, the judge imposed a sentence of only 1 year and 10 months without providing a clear rationale for the leniency. This study employs a normative juridical approach using qualitative analysis methods, drawing from primary data in the form of court decision documents and secondary sources in criminal law literature. The findings indicate that although the elements of the offense were correctly identified, the judicial reasoning lacks a proportional and substantive justice framework. The absence of clear justification for the lenient sentencing reveals a significant weakness in the legal reasoning. From the perspective of justice and utility theories, the decision fails to meet the objectives of deterrence, public protection, and the victim's right to justice. In conclusion, this research asserts that Decision No. 342/Pid.B/2023/PN Mlg deserves critical evaluation so that Indonesia's criminal sentencing system may operate in a more transparent, fair, and socially beneficial manner.