Statement of complaint - Statement of complaint

From: Tulaganov Holdibek Turabekovich,
Residing at the address: Republic of Uzbekistan,
Tashkent region, Akhangaron District
Ozodlik meeting of citizens of the village, Oybulok village

STATEMENT OF COMPLAINT
I do live at the above address. My son Tulaganov Azim Holdibekovich was prosecuted without justification, evidence and the case was handed over to the court, and then my son reached a verdict and was sentenced by the court.
My son has minor children aged nine months, three and a half years and six years. He was forced to quit the job before the court sentence against him. As a result, his family lost their right to receive financial aid.
In KUYICHIRCHIK district court on criminal cases my son’s guilt has not been proven. However, the judge Malikov ruled unjust sentence for my son.
In the Court of Appeal of the Tashkent Regional Court on December 25, 2012, in the grievance process, the panel of judges did not even want to listen to the arguments of counsel, and the court upheld the verdict in force and applied the Act of Amnesty of the Senate of Oliy Majlis (Supreme Council) of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated December 5, 2012, in honor of the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution, and the term of punishment set down in the third times.
Then, I made a complaint in the control order and asked for absolution. Acting Prosecutor of Tashkent region has made a protest in the order control in which he asked to cancel my complaint because there was no guidance supplements on the first sentence of the sentence of the court.
The control authority quashed the first instance, and passed a criminal case to Almalyk city court on criminal cases for reconsideration. In Almalyk city court on criminal cases, I have been accused of Paragraph 1 of Article 206, paragraphs "a, " part 2 of article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan and for these crimes Part 1 of Article 206 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan I was sentenced to correctional labor for a term two (2) years with the retention of 20% of salary to the state, and part 2 of article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, in applying Article 57 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan has been sentenced for correctional labor for a term of two (2) years and six (6) months with retention of 20% of salary to the state, on the basis of Article 59 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, by adding the partial punishment was scheduled final sentence of correctional labor for a term of three (3) years with the retention of 20% of their wages to the state and the deprivation of certain rights for a period of two (2) years.
I made an appeal regarding the sentence of Almalyk City Criminal Court, which was handed down towards me, and it was considered by Criminal Court of Tashkent City and this court upheld the conviction.
In turn, I believe, all the sentences and the determination made by the courts of all level arrangement are illegal. Especially determination made by the Criminal Court of Tashkent City. Once again, I would argue, these judges even forgot to apply the act of amnesty of the Senate of Oliy Majlis (Supreme Council) of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated December 5, 2012 in honor of the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution and that the target date of punishment must be at least cut in third part. So, as they have proven that they have considered a criminal case only formally.
They are the culprits that a young family is in a financially difficult position in this year of “Prosperity of the family”.
I ask you to publish my application to the Internet, because the judiciary, law enforcement agencies are not accepting my complaints and allegations and that they are totally indifferent to establish the actual situation.

Chairman of the Tashkent City Criminal Court

STATEMENT in control order

Tulaganova Azim Holdibekovicha by the verdict of the Court of Criminal Cases of Almalyk, Tashkent region, handed down April 10, 2013, and by definition of the Court of appeal in criminal cases in Tashkent, handed down May 24, 2013

STATEMENT in control order
Determination of the Court of appeal in criminal cases in Tashkent on 24 May 2013 my appeal was upheld.
Sentence of the Court of Criminal Cases of Almalyk city, Tashkent region on April 10, 2013 I was found guilty under by the Part 1 of Article 206, paragraphs "a, " part 2 of article 210 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, and the same court for criminal cases under part 1 of Article 206 Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan appointed towards me a sentence of correctional labor for a term of two (2) years with the condition of retention of 20% of salary to the state, and applying Article 57 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan items "a, " part 2 Article 210 towards me it was established attraction to correctional labor for a period two (2) years and 6 (six) months with the condition of retention of 20% of salary to the state and the partial addition of the penalties imposed on the basis of Article 56 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, I was sentenced for the final punishment in the form of attraction of correctional labor for a term of three (3) years with the of retention of 20% of salary to the state and the deprivation of certain rights for a period of two (2) years.
The trial of the criminal case the first time was held in the Criminal Court of Kuychirchiksk district. Court verdict in criminal cases of Kuychirchiksk district from November 5, 2012 I was found guilty of Part 1 of Article 206, paragraphs "a, " part 2 of article 210 of the Criminal Code towards me and was sentenced to a prison for the term of 2 (two ) year under Part 1 of article 206 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan and the points "a, " part 2 of Article 210 is also sentenced to imprisonment for a term of five (5) years, and by the partial addition of the penalties imposed on the basis of Article 59 of the Criminal Code of Uzbekistan, I was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of six (6) years and applying article 72 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan with regard to set me probation for a period of two (2) years.
In turn, I did not agree with the verdict in the Criminal court of KUYICHIRCHIK districts from November 5, 2012, made a complaint in the order of appeal.
My appeal was considered in the Appeals Chamber of the Court of Criminal Cases of Tashkent region. The verdict was upheld I was applied Act of Amnesty of the Senate of the Oliy Majlis (Parliament) of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated December 5, 2012 in honor of the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the republic of Uzbekistan. Established punishment was reduced by one third.
After that I had filed a complaint in control order and asked to exculpate me.
In turn, the acting prosecutor of Tashkent region has also made a protest in the control order procedure in which he requested the court to cancel the verdict of the first instance because it does not specify the additions on the punishment.
The control authority canceled the sentence imposed at first instance and sent a criminal case for re-examination to the Criminal Court of the Almalyk city.
Court's appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases in Tashkent took my appeal against the sentence meted out to me by a criminal court of the city Almalyk, Tashkent region April 10, 2013 and the court affirmed the court decision.
In turn, I believe that the sentences and definitions given by the courts of all instances are illegal. Particularly, said proves determination made by the Appeals Chamber of the Court of Criminal Cases of the city of Tashkent, as it judges even forgot about the need for the Act of Amnesty of the Senate of the Oliy Majlis (Parliament) of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated December 5, 2012 in honor of the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the republic of Uzbekistan and the need to reduce at least a third of their specified sentence. This proves that they considered criminal tenuously.
I would like to express the opposition to the following:
1) Based on the order of the chief institutions of the penalty № 52 of the Prisons Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Uzbekistan № 6 on January 24, 2012 I was sent on a business trip with the condemned attracted to the construction of border in the Fergana region.
On January 25, 2012 I fully accept the condemned. Since October of the same year the snow started to fall and started strong frosts. The conditions of life of the sentenced people at the time was poor especially in January and February months, for this reason, in order to create a normal warm conditions they collected logs to drown oven and cook their own meals.
2) Short-term meetings of the convicted Yusupzhanov M. in the period from January 26 to January 27, 2012, referred to me in the episodes included in the description of the charges applied against me, and meetings of 3, 6, 8 February 2012 were granted after obtaining permission from the Head of the institution of the penalty number 52 by telephone calls. I have had phone conversations with the Head of the institution during January - February, 2012. However, this information about my talks has not taken a preliminary investigation.
3) Sentenced R.Hamdamov had also been a meeting dated on 8 February 2012 with the permission of the head of the institution.
4) The lawyer received a letter of explanation from the sentenced M.Yusupzhanov. In this explanatory letter M.Yusupzhanov wrote that the black pants he bought for 30, 000 sum which I gave him. However, the controverted evidence of the sentenced M.Yusupzhanov was changed and according to the new indication, these pants were allegedly donated as a bribe. Head of the institutions has needed just such a reading, because he wanted to hide the fact that the permissions on a meeting was given by him and he wanted to confuse the investigation. Sentenced M.Yusupzhanov is simple sentenced whose term of punishment has not passed yet, his fortune is in the hands of the head of the institution, he cannot do anything against him. He is forced to do anything that would require the head of the institution, even though it is legal or illegal.
5). Sentenced R.Hamdamov said that he voluntarily wanted to give me a cologne with the value of 30 000 - 40 000 sum, however, that his older sister sent him H.Hamdamova women's perfume worth 15, 000 sum, but this information was not specified in the sentence. However, this indication is recoerded in the documents of the criminal case. Sentenced R.Hamdamov as well as sentenced M.Yusupzhanov forced to carry out unlawful instructions from the head of the institutions.
6) From the testimony of these two can be sentenced to understand that they did not give me a bribe, one of them brought me pants that were bought with my money, and the second would willingly give me a cologne on Valentine's Day.
7) I think it is not correct initiation of criminal proceedings against me by Part 1 of Article 206 and the points "a" and "c" of paragraph 2 of Article 2010 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan. My actions were carried out in compliance with the rules of the regime penal institutions. However, I have not committed a crime described in Part 1 of Article 206 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan and do not cause serious, big damage to the interests of government and society. In the notes to this article pointed out that the term "damage on a large scale" means the damage in the amount of thirty to one hundred times the minimum monthly wage. The notion of "serious harm" is the concept of the assessed according to this indicated that, in many cases to establish the property or property damage must consider the consequences of an act related to the abuse of power that, in determining the severity of the damage is necessary to take into account the number of victims, the size of the moral, physical and property the damage caused to them. " When this case was not set serious harm as a moral, physical, and as property damage, it follows that the said act cannot be regarded as an abuse of power and this case does not lead to criminal liability, and the administration should only take a decision on the application of a disciplinary action against me.
8) I was charged under paragraphs "a", "b" of Part 2 of Article 210 of the Criminal Code, by reason of the fact that the investigator who conducted the preliminary investigation unilaterally is not highlighted evidence that could help me but rather exaggerated accusatory statements trying to imagine me guilty.
9) In testimony of the agent Murodillaev answering to the questions of the lawyer "where and from whom you took the men's cologne, concluding the protocol?, Did you take the black pants from sentenced M.Yusupzhanov, concluding the protocol?" He replied, "I did not get from anyone men's cologne and black pants, concluding the protocol, I just heard about cologne and trousers." From this we can conclude that the testimony given in the criminal case does not prove what is possible or real evidence. No physical evidence is not possible to accuse me of taking bribes.
10). If I am guilty and my guilt is proven in the course of the trial, in this case, the fact that the verdict of the court has not applied the Act of Amnesty of the Senate of the Oliy Majlis (Parliament) of the Republic of Uzbekistan dated December 5, 2012 in honor of the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Constitution of the republic of Uzbekistan and that shows that my legal interests were violated.
11). Because of the above and the fact that the verdict was passed without taking into account the requirements specified in paragraph 1 of Part 1 of Article 484 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Uzbekistan, that is, that the court delivered its verdict without taking into account " that the investigation is not complete and unilateral conduct" and without taking into account the requirements specified in paragraph 2, that is "not living up to the conclusions of the court stated in its judgment, the actual facts of the case" and because there was no proper criminal prosecution for these items, I ask you to stop the production of the criminal case and render a verdict towards me.
Appendix:
1. A copy of the verdict in criminal cases of KUYICHIRCHIK district;
2. A copy of the Criminal of Court of Tashkent region;
3. A copy of the verdict in criminal cases of Almalyk;
4. A copy of the Criminal of Court Cases of the city of Tashkent.