The number of violent criminals escaping prosecution for assault has more than doubled following the introduction of guidelines designed to reduce pressure on courts and cut costs.

Crown Office figures reveal a 104% rise in offenders guilty of assault who were issued with fines, compensation orders or cautions as an alternative to appearing in court.

Between April and June this year, “direct measures” were used in 1,565 cases, compared with 768 during the same period last year.

In some procurator fiscal offices, the increase has been even greater, including a trebling of assaults escaping court in Airdrie and a four-fold rise in Kilmarnock and Linlithgow.

The surge in numbers follows the introduction in March of Summary Justice Reform (SJR), which allows fiscals to dispose of minor cases with fines or warnings.

While direct measures are not supposed to be used for serious violent crime, in one case a man who shoved a glass into a woman’s face in a Dumbartonshire pub was told to pay £100 compensation to his victim.

Lawyers and MSPs claim the statistics prove direct measures are being used inappropriately by fiscals and are putting the public at risk, a charge denied by the Crown Office.

In June, Kenny MacAskill, the justice secretary, insisted the changes would not “downgrade” crime. “Fiscal direct measures are not intended to be used in cases where the court would be likely to send an offender to prison,” he said.

But Lord McCluskey, one of Scotland’s most senior retired judges, said that the changes were “dramatic” and “very concerning”.

Gavin Brown, Tory MSP for Lothians, who obtained the figures through a parliamentary question, said they showed that the system was not working as intended. “This was meant to free up court time for serious cases, so I would have expected direct measures for assault to go down as more offenders were prosecuted in court. Instead we have seen the opposite,” he said.

“The thought that someone can glass a person and get a direct measure instead of a criminal record is terrifying.

“I supported SJR when it went through Holyrood, but it was never meant for serious cases where there is a victim and where there is violence.”

Martha Rafferty, a criminal defence solicitor with Glasgow firm Anthony Mahon, added: “It’s difficult to see any deterrent in a system that lets the number of people avoiding court for assault go up 100% overnight. This is a stark warning to the Crown Office that direct measures are being over-used.”

McCluskey, a former solicitor-general, said fiscals could be using the reforms to ease their workload. “Fiscals are absolutely overwhelmed by paperwork at the moment, there’s no shadow of a doubt about that,” he said. “One can well understand that, out in the field there, they are swamped with work and they have to use these measures.”

Official budget documents show prosecutors hope to save millions of pounds a year through the reforms by movingsome cases to “cheaper” courts.

The Crown Office said the figures did not include serious assaults and the use of fiscal fines had risen by 2% overall since SJR was introduced.

“The majority of fiscal fines are used for public drinking, failure to have a TV licence, breach of the peace, and shoplifting,” it said. “These figures do not include any charges of serious assault, such as assault \to severe injury, because our guidance and our IT systems prevent fiscal fines being given for these cases.

“Fiscals are using fiscal fines carefully and in line with the expectations of the Scottish parliament.”

Times Recommends

• Shrinking violet Gordon turns into raging bull
• Eddie Izzard: 'I keep thinking if I do all these things she'll come back'
• Is sex for the disabled the last taboo?