Section 162: Court Action on a Proper Charge

Supreme Court decisions interpreting this section

1. Supreme Court Judgment No. 1688/2561 (2018)

   Accepting a private prosecution for preliminary examination under section 162(1) does not oblige the court in every case to hold the examination, find the charge prima facie made out, and accept it for trial. Where the court sees that the defendant did not commit the act, that the act is not an offence, that the case is time barred, or that there is a legal ground on which the defendant should not be punished, section 185 requires it to dismiss the charge and release the defendant. The grounds of dismissal come from section 185, not from section 162(1) itself.

   The plaintiffs contended that the courts below had skipped a step by dismissing their private prosecution without holding a preliminary examination and accepting the charge under section 162(1). The Supreme Court held that admitting a charge for preliminary examination does not always require the court to examine it, find it prima facie made out and accept it: section 185 directs the court to dismiss and release the defendant where the defendant did not commit the act, the act is not an offence, the case is time barred, or there is a legal ground for not punishing the defendant. Having concluded that the acts alleged against the five defendants were entirely free of criminal liability, the courts below were entitled to dismiss without holding a preliminary examination or accepting the charge, and the Supreme Court agreed.

2. Supreme Court Judgment No. 4582/2543 (2000)

   The purpose of the preliminary examination required by Section 162(1) in private prosecutions is to let the court screen at the outset whether the case has prima facie merit, that the alleged events really occurred, so the court is not used as a tool to trouble the other party through vexatious litigation.

   The Court explained that Section 162(1) requires a preliminary examination in private prosecutions so the court can check at the outset whether the case has real merit, meaning the pleaded events genuinely happened, and is not a vexatious action using the court to harass the opposing party.

Curated decisions with case numbers verified against the Supreme Court database. English renderings are the firm's editorial translation for study.