Tindak pidana penganiayaan diatur dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana (KUHP) melalui Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1946 Pasal 351-358 dalam BAB XX Buku II KUHP tentang Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan. Tindak pidana penganiayaan merupakan suatu tindakan yang dilakukan dengan sewenang-wenang untuk menindas atau menyiksa orang lain. Rumusan Masalah bagaimana pengaturan kewenangan hakim dalam perkara tindak pidana penganiayaan berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan serta bagaimana implementasi hakim dalam pertimbangan putusan nomor 7/Pid.B/2021/PN Kng, putusan nomor 9/Pid.B/2024/PN Cbn dan putusan nomor 170/Pid.B/2021/PN Idm tentang Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan. Tujuan penelitian untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis pengaturan kewenangan hakim dalam perkara tindak pidana penganiayaan berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan serta untuk mengetahui dan menganalisis implementasi hakim dalam pertimbangan putusan nomor 7/Pid.B/2021/PN Kng, putusan nomor 9/Pid.B/2024/PN Cbn dan putusan nomor 170/Pid.B/2021/PN Idm tentang Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan metode yuridis normatif, tahap penelitian dengan studi kepustakaan dan studi lapangan, teknik pengumpulan data dengan bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder, dan bahan hukum tersier, serta alat pengumpul data dengan dokumentasi kepustakaan dan wawancara. Hasil penelitian pengaturan tindak pidana penganiayaan telah diatur secara komprehensif pada Pasal 351-pasal 358 sesuai dengan jenis tindak pidananya. Hakim memiliki peran sentral dalam menegakkan hukum secara independen dengan mempertimbangkan keadilan substantif. Namun penerapan Pasal 351 (1) KUHP pada putusan nomor 9/Pid.B/2024/PN Cbn dan putusan nomor 170/Pid.B/2021/PN Idm kurang tepat. Simpulan hakim menjalankan peraturan dan kewenangan dengan mempertimbangkan aspek yuridis, filosofis, dan sosiologis. Saran dalam penelitian ini Pemerintah hendaknya melakukan pembaharuan hukum secara menyeluruh, khususnya terhadap KUHP dan KUHAP serta bagi Hakim diperlukan upaya korektif dan ketepatan pasal.
Kata Kunci: Pertimbangan Hakim, Penganiayaan, Putusan Pengadilan.

Criminal acts of assault are regulated under the Indonesian Penal Code (KUHP), specifically in Articles 351 to 358 of Chapter XX, Book II, as stipulated by Law Number 1 of 1946. Assault is defined as an arbitrary act committed to oppress or torture another person. The research problems addressed in this study are: how judicial authority in assault cases is regulated under the prevailing laws and regulations, and how judges implement their authority in considering decisions number 7/Pid.B/2021/PN Kng, decision number 9/Pid.B/2024/PN Cbn and decision number 170/Pid.B/2021/PN Idm on the crime of maltreatment. The objectives of this research are: to examine and to analyze the legal regulation of judicial authority in assault cases based on statutory provisions and to evaluate the implementation of judicial considerations in decisions number 7/Pid.B/2021/PN Kng, decision number 9/Pid.B/2024/PN Cbn and decision number 170/Pid.B/2021/PN Idm on the crime of maltreatment. This research employs a normative juridical method, using literature study and field study as research stages. Data collection techniques include the use of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, with documentation and interviews serving as data collection tools. The findings indicate that the regulation of assault crimes is comprehensively stipulated in Articles 351 to 358 of the Penal Code, in accordance with the type of assault committed. Judges play a central role in upholding the law independently, with an emphasis on substantive justice. However, the application of Article 351 (1) of the Criminal Code in decision number 9/Pid.B/2024/PN Cbn and decision number 170/Pid.B/2021/PN Idm is incorrect. In conclusion, judges exercised their authority in accordance with legal provisions by taking into account juridical, philosophical, and sociological aspects. The recommendation of this study is for the government to carry out a comprehensive reform of criminal law, particularly the KUHP and KUHAP as well for judges, corrective measures and correctness of articles are required.
Keywords: Judicial Considerations, Assault, Court Decisions.