نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 کاراموز قضایی تهران و دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد، حقوق جزا و جرم شناسی، دانشگاه علوم قضایی و خدمات اداری، تهران، ایران.
2 قاضی دادگستری تهران و دانش آموخته دکتری حقوق جزا و جرم شناسی ، دانشگاه قم، قم، ایران
چکیده
کلیدواژه‌ها
عنوان مقاله [English]
نویسندگان [English]
Consideration of the matter must be by the competent authority.
Now, if the prosecutor's office, in spite of the incompetence and during the proceedings or the end of the trial, decides on one of the objectionable decisions, with the objection of the plaintiff or the other party to this case, the case will be sent to the competent court for consideration.
Pursuant to Articles 117 and 121 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of 1392, it can be said that the lack of jurisdiction does not cause violations of the court's numerical contracts by the court, so these appointments are excluded from the discussion.
Violation of the final misconduct of the prosecutor's office is subject to the complaint of the plaintiff and the court considers it in accordance with Article 274 of the said law.
Now, the important question is whether these objections are flawed and based on the above-mentioned article. Can the court violate the final objections of the protester?
According to the article, it does not answer this question and this has caused a difference in the jurisprudence and legal practice of the judiciary
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
)