SURABAYA, LITERASIHUKUM.COM — The Surabaya District Court (PN) held the first hearing of the alleged destruction and forced eviction case that befell an elderly woman named Elina Widjajanti (80). In the trial, which took place in the Kartika Room on Wednesday (15/4/2026), the main defendant, Samuel Ardi Kristanto, was presented directly before the panel of judges to hear the indictment read by the Public Prosecutor (JPU).

This trial has attracted juridical attention because the public prosecutor has applied the construction of the new National Criminal Code (KUHP) instrument. JPU Ida Bagus Putu Widnyana charged Samuel with multiple articles. The defendant was charged using Article 525 juncto Article 20 letter d of Law Number 1 of 2023 for allegedly inciting other people to commit criminal acts through promises or rewards. In addition, Samuel was also charged with violating Article 262 paragraph (1) in the same regulation regarding acts of violence against people or goods carried out openly and energetically together.

Based on the chronological order in the indictment, this case began on July 31, 2025. Samuel allegedly asked for help from a person named Yasin to carry out a forced eviction of a house in the Lontar area, Sambikerep District, Surabaya, which he claimed as his own. Armed with a sum of operational money from the defendant, Yasin and his group came to Elina's residence in early August 2025. The peak of the tension occurred the next day when the group of henchmen forced their way in, then dragged and lifted the elderly woman's body out of the yard. This repressive action, according to the prosecutor, resulted in injuries to the lip area and triggered deep psychological trauma for the victim.

Responding to the indictment, the defendant's legal team firmly denied it. Advocates Yafet and Robert Mantinia Soedarsono highlighted that the root of the problem in this case purely stemmed from a dispute over land ownership rights. The defense argued that the object of the dispute, administratively at the village level, had been recorded in the name of their client based on a sale and purchase transaction in 2014, which was considered to refute the victim's inheritance statement which was only issued in 2023.

Furthermore, the defense also denied the narrative of elements of repressive physical violence as described by the public prosecutor. They claimed that the process of moving the victim out of the house area was carried out without dragging, but by carrying her.

Based on the conflicting facts and legality of the land object, the defense team ensured that they would fight back through a note of objection. The Panel of Judges, chaired by Pujiono, then decided to postpone the trial and schedule a further hearing on Wednesday (22/4/2026) with a special agenda for reading the exception from the defendant.