Inefficiency of the present model of preparatory proceedings, which results in the significant lengthening of the whole penal procedure and causes inability to finish it within reasonable time limits, creates a necessity to develop a new model. It is suggested that in the model to be developed preparatory proceedings should not play the present role and clarify all the circumstances of an event and obtain all the evidence for a successful prosecution. Evidence and its contents should be only amassed during preparatory proceedings and they should be clarified during a trial. At this stage of a penal procedure, it should be only established whether there are substantial grounds to draw up charges against somebody and protect evidence that cannot be repeated at a trial. It is to help a public prosecutor take a decision whether to bring an accusation or drop the charges and refrain from prosecution. Only non-repeatable actions should be conducted by a judge responsible for the proceedings. A formation of such a model of these proceedings requires resignation from the rule of material truth and restructuring a trial to make it more contradictory that may be achieved by, among other things, depriving a court of an ability to perform acts of taking evidence in the proceedings as its official duty. Prosecutors as those who act mainly as public prosecutors should be located close to courts. Implementation of such a model would undoubtedly speed the performance of penal procedure and thanks to that we would put an end to one of the maladies of our legal system, lengthy duration of proceedings.