Abstract: In legal science, such a direction of research as individual legal regulation has become widespread. On its basis, types are distinguished, including individual judicial regulation. This concept is of particular importance for criminal proceedings and its study can lead to new theoretically and practically significant results. Considering that the study of individual judicial regulation has been conducted for many years in the general theory of law, in civil law, the purpose of this work was to generalize their individual results (in terms of the main features of individual judicial regulation) and to develop the main directions of their application in the field of criminal proceedings. The object of the study was relations in the field of judicial criminal procedural activity.
Methods of analysis, synthesis, generalization, comparative legal, formal legal, modeling were used in the study. The main results were expressed in the identification of knowledge useful for the science of the criminal process, obtained by scientists in the field of theory of law (V.V. Ershov, V.M. Gorshnev, S.S. Alekseev, etc.), civil law (V.V. Kulakov, A.D. Koretsky, V.V. Gruzdev, etc.) and determining their significance for conducting research of individual judicial regulation in criminal proceedings.
The author's conclusion based on the results of the study is the need to develop scientific research in relation to individual judicial regulation in criminal proceedings as a potentially effective means of resolving criminal law conflicts, taking into account the developing trends of procedural contracts, agreements and other vectors that increase the level of individuality of decisions made by the court.

Abstract: Criminal proceedings are the sphere of mandatory regulation. However, its development and modern achievements of the entire legal science as a whole make it possible to make relevant clarifications to its content (legislation and activities). The purpose of the work is to identify the most significant features of individual judicial regulation in the field of criminal proceedings and offer them to the general scientific community for discussion.
The main subject of this study was the theoretical concept of "individual judicial regulation" and its features in criminal proceedings. In criminal proceedings to date, such studies have been fragmentary, whereas in the theory of law, civil sciences, this area is represented by large-scale and fundamental works. It seems that the scale of the research and its long history should be realized not only in civil proceedings, civil and administrative law, but also in criminal proceedings. One of the first in this series should be the definition of the concept of "individual judicial regulation in criminal proceedings".

  In the course of the research, traditional scientific methodology was used: including general scientific methods (dialectics, analysis, synthesis, generalization, etc.), as well as private scientific methods - comparative legal and formal legal. The applied methods of scientific research allowed us to gain new knowledge concerning the essential features of individual judicial regulation and their use in defining this concept.
The result was the author's definition of individual judicial regulation in criminal proceedings. The application of the results is possible in the field of ongoing scientific research, in terms of improving criminal procedure legislation and the practice of its application. The main conclusion of the author is the need to introduce the concept of individual judicial regulation into criminal proceedings at the level of its theoretical provisions and into the legislative framework.

Abstract: The object of this research is the criminal procedural relations forming in the course of preparation for trial within pretrial procedure on criminal cases, including hearing of motions on investigation. The author points out that certain aspects of judicial activity in such legal and social significance remain without proper attention from the legislator. The subject of the research is the institution of trial preparation. Its most interesting aspect is the differentiation of this institution, consequences of this process and its manifestation in the criminal procedural legislation. The author formulates proposals that would allow organizing the procedural work of the judge and other parties in the trial at the pretrial stage of the criminal procedure, including hearing of motions on investigation. Original proposals are devised and substantiated by the author pertaining to the form of realization of the pretrial preparation institution for hearing motions on investigation during pretrial in criminal cases.

Abstract: The object of this research is the criminal procedural relations forming in the course of preparation for trial within pretrial procedure on criminal cases, including hearing of motions on investigation. The author points out that certain aspects of judicial activity in such legal and social significance remain without proper attention from the legislator. The subject of the research is the institution of trial preparation. Its most interesting aspect is the differentiation of this institution, consequences of this process and its manifestation in the criminal procedural legislation. The author formulates proposals that would allow organizing the procedural work of the judge and other parties in the trial at the pretrial stage of the criminal procedure, including hearing of motions on investigation. Original proposals are devised and substantiated by the author pertaining to the form of realization of the pretrial preparation institution for hearing motions on investigation during pretrial in criminal cases.

Abstract: The institution of preparation of criminal cases for trial is defined by the order of procedural actions and procedural decisions at the time of transfer of the criminal case from the prosecutor’s office to the court. The results of the corresponding criminal procedure work of the authorized subjects are defined by the efficiency of trial of the criminal case in court, including such aspect as speediness of trial of the criminal case. The importance of the procedural tasks before the institution of preparation of criminal cases, the need for optimization of the ways and means of their solution actualizes the academic research on the corresponding issues. One of the factors contributing to current increase of academic interest towards this institution is the development of judicial work at the pretrial stages, which seems to require advancement and normative formalization of the precepts of preparation for trial in cases submitted to court by the parties of the criminal justice according to the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, recommendation of the branch of preliminary investigation on detective work, execution of preventative measures, etc.

Abstract: The institution of preparation of criminal cases for trial is defined by the order of procedural actions and procedural decisions at the time of transfer of the criminal case from the prosecutor’s office to the court. The results of the corresponding criminal procedure work of the authorized subjects are defined by the efficiency of trial of the criminal case in court, including such aspect as speediness of trial of the criminal case. The importance of the procedural tasks before the institution of preparation of criminal cases, the need for optimization of the ways and means of their solution actualizes the academic research on the corresponding issues. One of the factors contributing to current increase of academic interest towards this institution is the development of judicial work at the pretrial stages, which seems to require advancement and normative formalization of the precepts of preparation for trial in cases submitted to court by the parties of the criminal justice according to the Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Russian Federation, recommendation of the branch of preliminary investigation on detective work, execution of preventative measures, etc.