Judge's Considerations in Assessing the Continued and Burdensome Theft of Toll Road Barrier Iron
Pertimbangan Hakim dalam Menilai Pencurian Besi Pembatas Jalan Tol yang Berlanjut dan Memberatkan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47268/pamali.v6i2.3750Keywords:
Judge's Consideration, Legal Consequences, Continued Theft, Incriminating Circumstances, Toll RoadsAbstract
Introduction: The rampant theft of public facilities, including toll road guardrails, is an unlawful act that causes material losses to managers and has the potential to endanger the safety of road users. The complexity of this crime increases when carried out continuously, magnifying the impact of losses and risks, and causing public unrest that requires stricter supervision of toll road infrastructure.
Purposes of the Research: This study aims to analyze the judge's considerations in deciding the case of the theft of toll road barrier iron which is carried out continuously and in incriminating circumstances, based on the study of Decision Number 13/Pid.B/2025/PN Tjk.
Methods of the Research: This study uses a normative juridical approach by examining applicable laws, as well as an empirical approach through interviews with investigators, public prosecutors, and judges at the Tanjung Karang District Court. Secondary data were obtained from primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, as well as primary data from interviews.
Results Main Findings of the Research: The findings show that the legal consequences against the perpetrators in Decision Number 13/Pid.B/2025/PN Tjk are comprehensive and proportional, including detention, imprisonment for 2 (two) years, confiscation and return of evidence, and the imposition of case costs. This is in line with the theory of legal consequences of R. Soeroso, which emphasizes that every criminal event gives rise to rights and obligations for the perpetrator as well as the authority of the state to uphold justice. The judge's consideration in deciding this case has met the elements of continuing and incriminating theft, including the analysis of evidence, trial facts, social impact, and aggravating and mitigating circumstances. This finding is in line with the theory of consideration of judge Sudikno Mertokusumo in balancing legal certainty, justice, and benefits for the defendant and the community.
References
Daffa Ladro Kusworo, Maghfira Nur Khaliza Fauzi. “Diversion In the Settlement of Crime Theft by Minor at Tanjung Karang District Court”. Cepalo Journal 7, no. 1 (2023), h.30. https://jurnal.fh.unila.ac.id/index.php/cepalo/article/view/2855.
Erlina Bachri, Nauval Murtadho. “Implementasi Pembuatan Surat Tuntutan Jaksa dan Hubungannya Dengan Putusan Hakim Dalam Kasus Pencurian (Studi Putusan Nomor 1085/Pid.B/2023/PN Tjk)”, Jurnal Rectum 6, no. 3 (2024), h. 546. https://jurnal.universitasdarmaagung.ac.id/jurnalrectum/article/view/4752.
Ismu Gunadi, Jonaedi Efensi. Cepat dan Mudah Memahami Hukum Pidana, Jakarta: Kencana, 2020.
Kasmanto Rinaldi,dkk. Dinamika Kejahatan dan Pencegahannya Potret Beberapa Kasus Kejahatan di Provinsi Riau, Malang: Ahlimedia Press, 2022.
Merliana S. Koesumoatmadja, Rochmani. “Penanggulangan Terhadap Tindak Pidana Pencurian dengan Pemberatan (CURAT) Yang Dilakukan Oleh Begal di Wilayah Hukum Polrestabes Semarang”, Jurnal of Swara Justisia 7, no. 3 (2023), h. 945. https://swarajustisia.unespadang.ac.id/index.php/UJSJ/article/view/399.
Rian Prayudi Saputra. “Perkembangan Tindak Pidana Pencurian di Indonesia”, Jurnal Pahlawan 2, no. 2 (2020), h. 2. https://journal.universitaspahlawan.ac.id/index.php/jp/article/download/573/491/20823.
Rumpang, A., Rahman, Natsir. “Identifikasi Sidik Jari Dalam Mengungkap Tindak Pidana Pencurian”, Jurnal Litigasi Amsir 9, no. 1 (2021): 26-33. http://journalstih.amsir.ac.id/index.php/julia/article/view/54.
Tami Rusli. “Analisis Gugatan Wanprestasi Dalam Jual Beli Tanah (Studi Putusan Nomor 127/Pdt.G/2014/PN.Tk)”, Jurnal Pranata Hukum 11, no. 1 (2016), h. 52. https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/160172-ID-analisis-gugatan-wanprestasi-dalam-jual.pdf.
Downloads
Article History
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Tami Rusli, Refi Shely Ristianti

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
License Terms: PAMALI: Pattimura Magister Law Review is disseminated based on the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license terms. This license allows anyone to copy and redistribute this material in any form or format, compose, modify, and make derivatives of this material for any purpose. You cannot use this material for commercial purposes. You must specify an appropriate name, include a link to the license, and certify that any changes have been made. You can do this in a way that is appropriate, but does not imply that the licensor supports you or your use.
