Undang-Undang No. 11 Tahun 2012 tentang Sistem Peradilan Pidana Anak, Pasal 60 ayat (3) “Hakim wajib mempertimbangkan laporan penelitian kemasyarakatan dari Pembimbing Kemasyarakatan sebelum menjatuhkan putusan perkara”, ayat (4) “Dalam hal laporan penelitian kemasyarakatan sebagaimana dimaksud pada ayat (3) tidak dipertimbangkan dalam putusan Hakim, putusan batal demi hukum”. Namun hingga saat ini masih ditemukan putusan pengadilan yang sama sekali tidak mempertimbangkan laporan penelitian kemasyarakatan. Permasalahan yang perlu dikaji apakah sebab Hakim tidakmempertimbangkanLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan, dan bagaimanakah konsekuensihukumjikatidakdilaksanakannyaLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan.Tujuanpenulisanini untukmengetahuisebab Hakim tidakmempertimbangkanLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan dan untuk mengetahuikonsekuensihukumjikatidakdilaksanakannyaLaporanPenelitianKemasyarakatan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu yuridis empiris. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian diketahui bahwadalammemutuskanperkaraanak yang berhadapandenganhukum,Hakim memilikialasanterhadaptidakmenguraikanlaporanpenelitiankemasyarakatanpadaputusan karena Hakim padaprinsipnyasudahmempertimbangkanlaporanpenelitiankemasyarakatan. Konsekuensihukumjika Hakim tidakmempertimbangkanLitmas yaitu anak masih tetap bisa ditahanuntuk proses peradilan yaitu perbaikan Putusan. Disarankan agar Hakim dapat mengulasisi materi dari Litmas dalam putusannya, termasukrekomendasi yang diberikanolehBapas.DisarankankepadaKementerianHukumdan HAM supayamemperhatikanketersediaantenagafungsionalBapassertapeningkatankompetensi agar menghasilkanLitmas yang semakinbaik sehingga jauh dari persepsi “copy paste”Law Number 11 Year 2012 on the Criminal Justice System of the Child, in Article 60 paragraph (3) "The judge is obliged to consider the reports of the research community from the community Supervisor before dropping the lawsuit verdict "paragraph (4) In terms of Community research reports as referred to in paragraph (3) are not considered in the judge's verdict, the verdict is annulled by law ". However up to now still found the Court ruling that simply does not consider research report. Problems that need to be examined whether because the judge did not consider Viable research report, and how do the legal consequences if it does not tackle in the research report. The purpose of this writing is to know because the judge did not consider the report of the Research Community and to know the legal consequences if it does not tackle in the research report. The research method used i.e. empirical juridical. Based on the results of the research it is known that in deciding a child dealing with matters of law, The judge has a reason against civic research report outlines not at ruling because Judges in principle had already been considering a research report. The legal consequences if the judge does not consider Litmas i.e. children still could be detained for judicial process, namely the improvement award. It is recommended that Judges can mengulasisi material from Litmas in an award, including the recommendations given by Bapas. It is recommended to the Ministry of Justice and human rights in order that notice of the availability of functional competency enhancement as well as Bapas in order to produce better Litmas so far from the perception of "copy paste".