The judicial panel for criminal cases of the appellate instance of the Tashkent City Court dated June 5 ruled to release the former chief of Toshshahartranskhizmat Anvar Dzhuraev.
Anvar Dzhuraev’s 4.5-year imprisonment sentence has been replaced with a 4.5-year house arrest. He was also banned from holding positions with financial responsibility and management positions in the Toshshahartranskhizmat for a period of 3 years. Information about the replacement of the punishment for the official caused a discussion in society.
Today, the head of the Public Relations Center of the Supreme Court, Aziz Abidov, came out with an explanation of the situation.
In February, the Yunusabad District Criminal Court found Anvar Juraev and 20 employees of Tashshahartranskhizmat and bus depots owned by the company guilty of committing crimes under paragraph Theft by misappropriation or embezzlement charge and other articles.
The court sentenced the accused Anvar Juraev and other persons to pay 2,475,687,526 soums. Based on the appeals of Anvar Juraev and 10 defendants, as well as the prosecutor's protest, this crime was considered in the appellate instance of the Tashkent City Court, and the damage caused by the defendants was fully compensated during the trial.
Part 4 of Article 167 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan provides: in the event of compensation for financial damage, the punishment in the form of house arrest and imprisonment shall not be applied.
Accordingly, with this of the appellate court issued a ruling, taking into account the compensation for damages for the main crime, the defendants were not sentenced to imprisonment.
The money was transferred to the treasury account. Two real estate properties acquired with funds obtained by criminal means and used to compensate for damages were confiscated in favor of the state.
The Supreme Court noted that citizens dissatisfied with the court's ruling can appeal it or file a protest in the supervisory procedure with the Tashkent City Court.
There are far more questions than answers. How did the accused ever manage to repay the so-called financial damage to the state given his all-lavish lifestyle? Was the "damage to state" properly estimated? Or have they stolen on other ocassions? Or was one of the own released? With the same logic if the schoolteacher who had a monthly pay about 200 USD and who was sentenced to six years in prison for a 50 USD bribe in 2022 repays the latter he shall also be freed.
