A Legal Analysis of Evidence in Counterfeit Money Cases
(A Case Study of the Donggala District Court Decision No. 278/Pid.B/2022/PN Dgl)
Keywords:
Evidence, Criminal Liability, Counterfeit MoneyAbstract
This study aims to analyze the evidentiary process in criminal cases involving the circulation of counterfeit money, as well as the form of criminal liability borne by the perpetrator, as reflected in the Donggala District Court Decision No. 278/Pid.B/2022/PN Dgl. The research employs a normative legal method using statutory and case approaches. The data utilized are secondary data, consisting of primary legal materials in the form of the Donggala District Court Decision No. 278/Pid.B/2022/PN Dgl and secondary legal materials derived from legal literature, legislation and other relevant legal documents. The findings indicate that the evidentiary process in this case was formally conducted in accordance with the provisions of the KUHAP, as it fulfilled the minimum requirement of two valid pieces of evidence namely, witness testimony and the defendant’s statement. Based on these evidences, the court found the defendant legally and convincingly guilty of committing the crime of circulating counterfeit money. However, the absence of expert testimony during the trial weakened the material aspect of the evidence, particularly in assessing the element of intent more thoroughly. The defendant’s criminal liability was established based on the fulfillment of the element of intent (dolus), the capacity for criminal responsibility and the absence of justifying or excusing grounds that could eliminate the defendant’s culpability. Thus, the court’s decision in this case reflects a procedurally appropriate application of criminal law, although certain aspects of evidence evaluation still require strengthening to ensure the realization of justice and legal certainty.
Downloads
References
Amin, Rahman. Hukum Pembuktian Dalam Perkara Pidana Dan Perdata. Deepublish, 2020.
Firdaus, Aulia Safa, Reza Reza, dan Riyo Riyadi. “Pengaruh Jumlah Uang Beredar Dan Tingkat Suku Bunga Serta Pengeluaran Pemerintah Terhadap Inflasi.” Jurnal Prospek: Pendidikan Ilmu Sosial Dan Ekonomi 4, no. 2 (2022): 62–70. https://doi.org/10.30872/prospek.v4i2.2234.
Handayani, Tri Astusi. Hukum Acara Pidana Tentang Pembuktian Dan Putusan Pengadilan. Nusamedia, 2021.
Hasnawati, Hasnawati, dan Mohammad Safrin. “Kedudukan Alat Bukti Elektronik dalam Pembuktian Tindak Pidana.” AL-MANHAJ: Jurnal Hukum dan Pranata Sosial Islam 5, no. 2 (2023): 1207–14. https://doi.org/10.37680/almanhaj.v5i2.2878.
Kelas Hukum Online. “Pertanggungjawaban Pidana: Siapa yang Dapat Dipidana dan Mengapa?” 2025. https://www.kelashukumonline.com/2025/06/materi-pertanggungjawaban-pidana.html.
Pertiwi, Mega Sekar. “Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Tindak Pidana Menyimpan Uang Rupiah Palsu (Studi Kasus).” Skripsi, Universitas Islam Riau, 2021.
Pratama, Dzuhri Eka. “Kajian Yuridis Terhadap Tindak Pidana Peredaran Uang Palsu.” JURNAL ILMU HUKUM AKTUALITA 1, no. 3 (2024): 122–36.
Purnamasari, Andi Intan, Supriyadi Supriyadi, Aminuddin Kasim, dan Sulbadana Sulbadana. “The Optimizing Digital Evidence: Perspective of the Criminal Procedural Law System:” Conf. paper presented pada 2021 Tadulako’s International Conference on Social Sciences (TICoSS 2021), Palu, Indonesia. 2022. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220707.022.
Putro, Bagas Pandega Hariyanto, dan Eko Soponyono. “Kebijakan Hukum Pidana Dalam Penanggulangan Tindak Pidana Pemalsuan Uang.” Law Reform 11, no. 2 (2015): 157–71.
Putusan Nomor 278/Pid.B/2022/PN Dgl (Pengadilan Negeri Donggala).
Wahid, Abdul. “Keadilan Restoratif: Upaya Menemukan Keadilan Substantif?” Jurnal Ius Constituendum 7, no. 2 (2022): 307–21. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v7i2.5793.
