تزاحم قرار منع تعقیب با قرار موقوفی تعقیب: با نگاهی به قانون آیین دادرسی کیفری ایران و فرانسه

Iran's judicial practice in cases where there is a conflict between the reasons for the prohibition of prosecution and the suspension of prosecution, is often inclined to the latter order. In this area, a question is raised; According to Article 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code, if the plaintiff passes away, is there any legal justification for issuing a suspension of prosecution for a behavior that, according to the investigation of the judicial authority, does not have a criminal character? The author is of the opinion that the issuance of a suspension of prosecution, considering the phrase "criminal order" at the beginning of the mentioned article and the phrase "forgivable crimes" in the mentioned paragraph, is related to the criminality of the behavior and if the behavior attributed to the accused According to the preliminary or extended judgment of the judicial authority, if it has a legal aspect or is considered a non-criminal matter, the issuance of a restraining order has priority, and the passing of the private plaintiff has no effect on the nature of the non-criminal matter or the cessation of this substantive assessment.
This issue has been brought to the attention of the legislators of this country in the French criminal procedure law in such a way that conciliation or restitution of the complaint as the plaintiff's right in "special" public lawsuits causes the prosecution to stop. Therefore, in this regard, the point of view of some judges regarding the priority of formal suspension of prosecution over substantive prohibition of prosecution is not absolutely acceptable. The author examines the subject in an analytical and descriptive. According to the knowledge and awareness that was obtained from the reasons for issuing the prohibition order and the suspension of prosecution, especially paragraph "b" of Article 13 of the Criminal Procedure Law, it should be acknowledged that the reasons for the prohibition order cannot be combined with the reasons for the suspension of prosecution. Because if there are reasons for the acquittal of the accused, especially the lack of criminal description or the lack of attention to the charges against the accused, there will be no reason to raise the reasons for suspending the prosecution, especially paragraph "b" of Article 13 of the Criminal Procedure Law, and the private plaintiff's indulgence in behavior that is basically It is not subject to criminal prosecution, it has no effect in stopping the prosecution with a suspension order, and the judicial authority is obliged to acquit the accused with a prohibition order according to Article 265 of the Criminal Procedure Law. Likewise, It is worth noting that if the Emirates and the witnesses do not pay enough attention to or attribute the accusation to the accused or it is weak or basically the judge is faced with the lack or lack of evidence and at this stage and during the investigation, the plaintiff declares his forgiveness, to The reason for this is that all four aforementioned conditions are present, the issuance of the suspension order is the first, and there is no need to prove the crime or the existence of evidence to prove the claim in accordance with Article 160 of the Islamic Penal Code at the time of issuing the order.