Review

The author analyzed the correlation of concepts, some criminal law and criminal procedural aspects of derailment of the absence of a criminal offense, establishment of the absence of a corpus of criminal offense and derailment of sufficient evidences to prove the guilt of a person in court and exhaustion of the possibilities of their obtaining as a basis for terminating the criminal proceedings. Attention is drawn to certain inconsistencies of the provisions of the CPC as for the determination of the reasons for terminating the criminal proceedings and circumstances subject to proof in criminal proceedings.

Installing the absence of corpus individual warehouse criminal offense Derailment sufficient evidence to prove the guilt of a person in court and exhaustion of opportunities to get them, enactment of a law which abolished criminal liability for acts committed by a person, the lack of criminally punishable act and lack of social danger of the act which formally contains elements of crime, the commission of which a notification made on suspicion of committing, are circumstances which exclude a crime at all, because they are signs (elements) of a crime. In the presence of any of the circumstances specified event action. The commission is put in guilt (charged with) the person is absent. Therefore, in the case of any of these circumstances in the decision of the investigator, prosecutor, as well as the acquittal as grounds for terminating the criminal proceedings is a reference to establish the absence of crime, with the specification of which is the specified circumstances (signs) events no offense.

Keywords: criminal offense, basis for terminating the criminal proceedings, evidence in criminal proceedings, the guiltiness of the accused of a criminal offense, the end of the preliminary investigation.