Previous 45 / 136 Next

Kesimpulan : seorang laki-laki dengan identitas diatas dengan lukaluka tersebut diatas akibat kekerasan tumpul dan tajam; Perbuatan Terdakwa tersebut diatur dan diancam Pidana dalam pasal 80 ayat (1) dan (3) Undang-undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 35 Tahun 2014 tentang perlindungan anak.; Membaca Surat Tuntutan Jaksa Penuntut Umum Kejaksaan Negeri Purwakarta No.Reg.Perkara : PDM-93/PRWAK/06.2015, tanggal 14 September 2015, Terdakwa dituntut sebagai berikut; 1. Menyatakan terdakwa MUHAMAD VERY MAULANA HIDAYATULLOH Als VERY Bin UNTUNG SUJADI terbukti bersalah melakukan tindak pidana "pembunuhan berencana dan melakukan kekerasan terhadap anak yang menyebabkan mati" sebagaimana dalam dakwaan melanggar \'S Kesatu Primair pasal 340 KUHP Dan Kedua pasal 80 ayat (1) dan (3) UU w V No. 35 tahun 2014 tentang Perlindungan Anak ; 2. Menjatuhkan pidana terhadap terdakwa dengan pidana mati; 3. Menyatakan Barang Bukti berupa : - 1 (satu) unit sepeda motor merk yamaha Vixion warna hitam dirampas untuk negara; - 1 (satu) bilah sangkur warna hitam dikembalikan kepada saksi Ade - 1 (satu) bilah plsau bergagang stailess bersarung warna hitam ; - 1 (satu) potong sweter warna hitam bertullskan Hurley; - 1 (satu) potong kaos lengan pendek warna merah ; - 1 (satu) buah tas selempang warna hitam merk Palazzo ; - 1 (satu) potong celana pendek warna hitam bertuliskan Solo Hadiningrat; - 1 (satu) potong kaos singlet berwarna hitam ; - 1 (satu) potong celana dalam warna hiau bertuliskan time dan show. dirampas untuk dimusnahkan.; 4. Membebankan kepada terdakwa untuk membayar biaya perkara sebesar Rp.5.000.- (lima ribu) rupiah ; Menlmbang, bahwa Pengadilan Negeri Purwakarta menjatuhkan putusan dalam perkara tersebut pada tanggal 06 Oktober 2015 Nomor 149/Pid.B/2015/PN.Pwk. dengan amar sebagai berikut: Halaman 19 dari 25 halaman, Putus. Nomor 304/PID/2015/PT.BDG"^

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

MUHAMAD VERY MAULANA HIDAYATULLOH alias VERY bin UNTUNG SUJADI

CASE BRIEF

Jurisdiction

Indonesia

Nationalities

Indonesian

Case Title: MUHAMAD VERY MAULANA HIDAYATULLOH alias VERY bin UNTUNG SUJADI

Age at Offence: 23

Age Group at Offence: Adult (18 to 59)

Gender: Male

Religious Group at Offence: Islam

Jurisdiction - Geolocation

Latitude: -6.293782809685137

Longitude: 106.84001863002779

Jurisdiction - Geolocation (linked CASE BRIEF): Indonesia

Contributing TRP Partner

Institute for Criminal Justice and Reform (Indonesia)

Latest Country's Death Penalty Status

Retentionist

Case Current Status: Closed: Reprieve by Executive

Year when sentenced to Death Row: 2010s: 2015

Method of Execution: Firing/Shooting: Squad

Rights Allegedly Violated

Fair Trial and Due Process: Right to fair hearing by impartial, independent tribunal

Nature of Offences for Death Penalty

Murder: Multiple Victims

Case Background (300 words max): Muhamad Very Maulana Hidayatullah was charged with premeditated murder under Article 340 of the Indonesian Penal Code, after stabbing and killing Sri Roswati, a pregnant woman, and her two children, Amelia Agustin and Alfian, in Purwakarta on 15 February 2015.

The incident was triggered by a workplace conflict. The defendant had been reprimanded by his supervisor, Widodo (husband of the victim), which left him feeling humiliated and angry. That night, Very decided to visit Widodo’s home to "settle the score." Armed with a knife, he entered the house and killed Sri Roswati and her children when she denied him entry and called for help.

He fled the scene and was later arrested. The autopsy reports confirmed multiple stab wounds that led to massive internal bleeding and death. He was charged with multiple articles, including child protection laws for violence leading to a child's death.

Defence Arguments (200 words max.): In the cassation memorandum, the defendant’s legal counsel argued that the murder occurred spontaneously, triggered by a sudden emotional reaction and not as the result of a well-planned or deliberate action. The defendant’s initial intent was directed toward Widodo, not the victims, and therefore the element of premeditation was absent.

The counsel further urged the panel of judges to maintain neutrality, refraining from siding with either the Public Prosecutor or the Defense Counsel. Legal considerations, they argued, should be grounded in the values upheld by positive legal principles, humanitarian norms, and human rights standards, rather than influenced by pressure or intervention from the victim’s family, who had consistently attended the trial and attempted to interfere in the proceedings.

Judgement with Headnotes (200 words max): The Supreme Court rejected the cassation appeal and upheld the death penalty, affirming the decisions of both the Purwakarta District Court and Bandung High Court.

The Court found no legal error in the lower courts’ reasoning. It concluded that the murder of a pregnant woman and two children, done with a weapon brought to the scene, constituted sadistic and inhumane premeditated murder.

Despite the dissenting opinion at the district court level and arguments around mitigating factors, the Supreme Court ruled that the brutality of the act outweighed any claims for leniency, and the death sentence was justified under Indonesian law.

Legal Representation Received

Trial: State Legal Aid
Appeal: State Legal Aid
Second Appeal: State Legal Aid
Pre-trial: Unknown

Legislation Related to the Offence(s): Law Number 1 of 1976 concerning the Criminal Code (KUHP) and Law Number 35 of 2014 concerning Child Protection

Case Brief Entry Status: Complete

Language of Case Materials

Bahasa Indonesia

Primary Documents

NO. 32 K_PID_2016.pdf
Indonesian
Download View

Death Penalty Defence - Asia

Select target paragraph3

MUHAMAD VERY MAULANA HIDAYATULLOH alias VERY bin UNTUNG SUJADI

Primary Documents

Notifications