Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Pengadilan Tentang Penipuan Arisan Online (Studi Putusan Nomor 138/Pid.B/2023/PN TGT Versus Putusan Nomor 287K/PID/2024) 	: Penelitian

Mahayani Ersandy Putri; Lanna Fadilla Citra

doi:10.31004/jerkin.v4i3.4870

Authors

Mahayani Ersandy Putri Universitas Esa Unggul
Lanna Fadilla Citra Universitas Esa Unggul

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31004/jerkin.v4i3.4870

Keywords:

Online Arisan Fraud, Court Decision, Criminal Law

Abstract

Online arisan fraud has become a serious threat in the digital era by exploiting supervisory loopholes and the lack of public literacy. This research juridically analyzes the Tanah Grogot District Court Decision Number 138/Pid.B/2023/PN Tgt and the Supreme Court Decision Number 287K/Pid/2024. The research results indicate a fundamental disparity in legal interpretation. The District Court decision tends to be conservative and fails to accommodate electronic evidence, acquitting the defendant as the act was deemed not to meet the elements of Article 378 of the Criminal Code. Conversely, the Supreme Court demonstrated a progressive interpretation, accepting digital evidence as valid proof, and declaring the defendant guilty. This proves that judges' understanding of information technology is crucial in deciding cases based on electronic evidence. This difference in approach demands the harmonization of the Criminal Code, the ITE Law, and digital forensic guidelines. This research recommends routine training, regulatory strengthening, inter-agency collaboration, and the application of restorative justice to strengthen law enforcement and the protection of online arisan victims.

References

Al Idrus, N. F., & Widowaty, Y. (2023). Tindak pidana penipuan berbasis transaksi elektronik.

Al Miski, Y. R., Putra, S. M., Purwanto, M. I., & Luthfiyyah, S. (2025). Eksistensi tindak pidana penipuan (bedrog) dalam Pasal 378 KUHP di era digital. Journal Equitable, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.37859/jeq.v10i2.9072

Arifin, Z., & Handayani, E. P. (2024). Buku ajar hukum siber perspektif.

Billah, R. S., & Saragih, H. (2025). Tantangan penegakan hukum kejahatan siber bagi hakim. Arus Jurnal Sosial dan Humaniora (AJSH), 5(2).

Hamzah, A. (2015). Asas-asas hukum pidana.

Kurnia, I. (2024). Hukum pidana siber.

Maulana, S., Rohana, H., & Wahyuni, N. S. (2025). Mobilisasi hukum pidana di era teknologi.

Mustikajati, A. A., Jalan, A., Sutami, I., & Tengah, J. (2024). Pertanggungjawaban pidana pelaku tindak pidana penipuan online berdasarkan perspektif KUHP dan Undang-Undang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik. Politika Progresif: Jurnal Hukum, Politik, dan Humaniora, 1(2).

Pakaya, D., Dungga, W. A., & Muhtar, M. H. (2024). Dinamika arisan daring: Perlindungan hukum dan tanggung jawab pengelola dalam kasus Putusan Nomor 1/Pdt.G.S/2021/PN Trt. Deleted Journal. https://doi.org/10.62335/rafzke95

Putu, N., Kemalasari, Y., & Effendi, I. (2024). Arisan online bermodus investasi. Jurnal Preferensi Hukum, 5(2), 231–239.

Rakha, N. A. (2023). Cybercrime and the law: Addressing the challenges of digital forensics in criminal investigations. Mexican Law Review, 16, 23–54.

Sandra, G. (2022). Considerations of judges in making decisions on a case. Journal of Judikaltura, 1(1), 6–10.

Saputra, A. D. (2024). Penegakan hukum terhadap tindak pidana penipuan arisan online di Indonesia. Al-Bahst: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik, dan Hukum, 2(1), 44–52.

Shabrina, A. A., Rusti, T., & Ramadan, S. (2025). Penegakan hukum terhadap pelaku tindak pidana penipuan (Studi Putusan Nomor 99/Pid.B/2024/PN TJK). Mandub: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum, dan Humaniora, 3(September).

Siregar, Z. A., & Sitorus, N. T. (2024). Tinjauan yuridis pembuktian elektronik dalam perkara tindak pidana penipuan online. Arbiter: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum, 6(2), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.31289/arbiter.v6i2.5343

Situmeang, S. M. T. (2020). Cyber law.

Soekanto, S. (2014). Pengantar penelitian hukum. UI Press.

Zachwa, A. M., & Muttaqin, L. (2025). Tinjauan yuridis penipuan online dikaitkan aspek pertanggungjawaban pidana (Studi kasus putusan pengadilan). Indonesian Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (IJCLC), 6(1), 29–37.