Apparently, the defendant (born in 1962) was registered in the Kibray district of Tashkent region. A fight broke out between the woman and her husband (born in 1949). On April 2, 2003, at about 08:30, the defendant stabbed her husband in the left chest in the apartment where he was temporarily living in the Yunusabad district and fled from the scene. The man died on the spot as a result of his bodily injuries and loss of blood.

Due to the fact that the incident happened in 2003, it was impossible to ensure the inevitability of punishment by the Tashkent city prosecutor’s office under Article 97 (Intentional murder) of the Criminal Code, because the criminal was hiding from the investigative authorities during the past period.

On June 11 of this year, officers of the Tashkent regional DIA organized a special event to arrest the woman together with the police of Kazakhstan. As a result, the woman who has been wanted for 19 years for committing a serious crime was arrested in Shymkent and extradited to Uzbekistan.

On October 13, the judgment was read out against the defendant in the Yunusabad district court on criminal proceedings of Tashkent city. According to the conclusion of the forensic examination, the death of the deceased was caused by “a stab wound in the left chest area with heart injury and acute external and internal bleeding”. The defendant pleaded guilty to the charge announced at the hearing.

The court found the woman guilty of committing the crime provided for in Article 97-1 of the Criminal Code, applying Article 57 of the Criminal Code, and sentenced her to 8 years of imprisonment. The relevant clause of the acts of the Republic of Uzbekistan on amnesty of 2003-2014 was applied to the defendant, and the terms of the punishment were reduced.

Due to the fact that the sentence imposed on the defendant has been fully served, the preventive measure of “detention” used against her was changed to the preventive measure of “application of good conduct” and she was released from prison in the courtroom.

It was taken into account that the victim’s legal representative did not have a claim against the defendant.