By the Prosecutor Generals office on January, 11th, 2010 on personal reception it is accepted lawyer Asanova D.S. in Hodenov A.M.'s condemned by a sentence of Zhitikarinsky regional court of Kostanay area interests.
By results of studying of criminal case arguments of the defender have found the acknowledgement and the Prosecutor Generals office in supervising instance of the Supreme Court brings the protest as supervision as the court of the first instance has not found out the questions, concerning Hodenov A.M.'s office powers and as a result has incorrectly stated a legal estimation to his actions.
On January, 11th, 2010 on reception of the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan Mami K.A. there was Citizen Oshakbaev ZH with the complaint about disagreement with taken place judicial decisions concerning brothers Achayevs.
As it is established, the verdict of guilty of the South Kazakhstan regional court decided with participation of jurymen from April, 23rd, 2009 concerning brothers Achayevs, is left on July, 15th, 2009 without change by the board decision on criminal cases of the Supreme Court of Republic of Kazakhstan.
According to item 577 CPC revision as supervision of the verdict of guilty decided with participation of jurymen, and also the court decision in connection with necessity of application of the criminal law on more grave crime in view of softness of punishment or on other bases involving deterioration of position condemned, and also revision of the verdict of "not guilty" or the court decision about the criminal case termination is not supposed.
In this connection, possibilities for protest of the taken place judicial certificates as supervision are not available.
The decision of the inspector Bajdibeksk PDIA the South Kazakhstan area from October, 1st, 2009 about manufacture stay on the criminal case raised upon destruction of another's property, made by an arson, Prosecutor Generals office on February, 2nd, 2010 it is cancelled, that is in this part arguments of the applicant are satisfied.
Prosecutor Generals office also had been cancelled decision DIA of the South Kazakhstan area about refusal in excitation of criminal case concerning officials Bajdibeksky RDIA from January, 21st, 2009, upon untimely withdrawal at Achayevs fowling piece employees of RDIA and about not work carrying out on preventive maintenance of fulfillment of offences.
The specified criminal case and materials have been directed the public prosecutor of the South Kazakhstan area for the organization of supervision of legality of preliminary investigation and inquiry.
Now criminal case concerning Achayev N under item 96 p.2 items «a, b, c» CC is considered in essence in the South Kazakhstan regional court which course of consideration is on the control. On the accepted measures it is informed the applicant.
On January, 11th, 2010 the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Mahanbetzhanov A.A., the ex - employee of police, with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation by a court sentence № 2 Almaty areas of Astana from March, 13th, 2009 for hooliganism fulfillment.
By results of studying by the criminal case Prosecutor Generals office it is established, that the fault of the hooliganism condemned in fulfillment with violence application to Abdaliev А and Bakylbekova G is completely confirmed by set of the proofs investigated in judicial session, namely: indications of victims, reports of investigatory actions, the conclusions of examinations, material evidences and other materials of business.
Punishment to the condemned is appointed taking into account weight of the committed crime and its person, according to requirements of item 52 CC and within article 257 sanction p.2 CC.
The infringements of norms of the criminally-remedial legislation attracting cancellation or change of judicial certificates, on business it is not revealed.
The court sentence № 2 Almaty areas of Astana from March, 13th, 2009 concerning Mahanbetzhanova A.A. are lawful and proved.
By results of consideration of the reference the answer about groundlessness of his complaint is given the applicant.
On criminal case concerning Karchu I, mother whom has addressed with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation of the daughter to the Head of the state as the crow flies, the Prosecutor Generals office has been brought the protest on the taken place judicial certificates of courts of Astana. On criminal cases of the Supreme Court of Republic Kazakhstan on February, 9th, 2010 the protest is completely satisfied by judicial supervising board, criminal case is directed on new judicial consideration.
On January, 11th, 2010 Prosecutor General of RK Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Kikbaev B.Z. with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation by his sentence of court of Zajsansky area of the East Kazakhstan area from March, 11th, 2009 upon attempt at bribery.
The similar complaint of the applicant has been considered earlier with studying of materials of criminal case following the results of which the answer by the assistant to the Prosecutor Generals office, that the bases to protest the decisions accepted by court has been directed the applicant.
During studying of affairs of wine of the applicant about attempt at bribery to the senior inspector of Financial police on K.Zharlygakovoj's Zajsansky site it is supported at judicial session by set of in details studied proofs, indications of witnesses, reports on a recognition and familiarizing of proofs, the conclusions it is judicial-video phonographic examination.
Criminal acts condemned by court are qualified correctly. Punishment is appointed according to requirements of article 52 CC taking into account public danger of the committed crime and all circumstances of business.
Infringements of the criminally-remedial legislation for cancellation of a sentence of court or its change are not available.
Sentence of Zajsansky regional court from March, 17th, 2009 and the board decision on criminal cases of regional court of the East Kazakhstan area are taken out lawfully. The bases for protest entering on the accepted decisions of court on criminal case are not available.
The answer following the results of complaint consideration is directed to Kikbaev B. signed by the Prosecutor Generals office.
On January, 11th, 2010 the Prosecutor General of Republic of Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Malshybaev B.S. with the petition for disagreement with the judicial decisions which have taken place concerning Tamenov V.K, the court of №2 of Families condemned by a sentence from August, 11th, 2009 under item 104 p.2 the item «d» CC by 3 years of imprisonment with application of item 63 CC 2 years are conditional with a trial period. Item 257 is excluded from charge p.3 CC, as unduly made.
Tamenov B.K.'s by court it is recognized by guilty of a deliberate trespass the suffered Malshybaev M. A's to health of the average weight made from hooligan promptings.
Studying of materials of criminal case has shown that the court has excluded item 257 p.3 CC as the crime arm (instrument) - knuckleduster during investigation has not been established.
However, having specified in a sentence, that the crime tool on business is not established, the court has unreasonably drawn a conclusion on a full exception of charge of item 257 CC.
Out of a legal estimation of court there was a fact of beating of Malshybaev M. A the condemned Tamenov V.K. together with the unknown person in which relation business materials are allocated in separate manufacture, before an input in billiard club in the afternoon days that allows to draw a conclusion on hooliganism Tamenov V.K.'s fulfillment in a group of persons on preliminary arrangement.
Thereupon, the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan on the present business brings the protest in the Supreme Court about cancellation of all judicial decisions which have taken place concerning Tamenov V.K.
On October, 7th, 2009 by the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception it has been accepted Tukenov Zh with the complaint about disagreement with the appointed measure of punishment concerning her brother - Segizbayev А.B, the Tarbagataj regional court condemned by a sentence from 19.06.2008. For causing of heavy harm to health (item 103 p.1 CC RK) by 3 years of imprisonment.
By studying of materials of criminal case it is established, that Segizbayev I, 1955 of a birth, earlier we do not judge, in a work and residence place it is characterized positively. After fulfillment Segizbayev I. of a crime, his wife has died, two minor children remained without care of parents.
Under such circumstances, appointed Segizbayev court punishment in the form of 3 years of real imprisonment is excessively severe.
Thereupon, the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan on the present business brings the protest as supervision in supervising board of the Supreme court about cancellation of the decision of supervising board of the East Kazakhstan regional court and оставления without change of the decision of board on criminal cases of the same court concerning Segizbayev regarding application to it of a conditional measure of punishment.
Similarly, within the limits of work on protection of constitutional laws and freedom of citizens, Kaliev M. K and Dementyev V. G's reference about cancellation of decision of Akim of Astana about garage legalization has been satisfied arrived on July, 7th, 2009 from personal reception of the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan of Mami K.A. In supervising board of court of Astana on corresponding civil case on the instructions of the Prosecutor Generals office the protest which by results of judicial consideration is satisfied has been brought, the taken place judicial acts have been cancelled with a civil case direction on new judicial consideration.
On reception on October, 7th Prosecutor Generals office Mami K.A. accepts Shahraj K.I. with the petition for acceptance of measures to the authorized state bodies of Astana because of their inactivity in a question of an illegal pulling down of garage.
It is established, that the ground area on which the garage (garage co-operative society "Steppe") the applicant is located, is in borders of the site which is subject to withdrawal for the state needs on the basis of the decision of akimat of a city.
In turn, by Akimat the given ground area is given the company-builder for carrying out of inspection, prospecting works and designing of a multiform inhabited complex under condition of the conclusion by it of contracts on conditions of indemnification with each of proprietors of the real estate which is on the given ground area.
At the same time, between the Applicant and the builder the agreement on the price of the withdrawn ground area and the property located on it is not reached, owing to what Shahraj K.I.'s indemnification has not been paid.
Along with it is established, that the builder in infringement of requirements of item 86 of the Ground code of Republic of Kazakhstan limits the rights of proprietors of garages to use of the ground areas to their definitive repayment by installation of a metal protection on perimeter of garage co-operative society.
Thereupon, the Office of Public Prosecutor of the city of Astana to Акима cities brings representation about elimination of infringements of legality with the requirement of restoration of the broken rights of proprietors of not redeemed garages.
On reception on October, 06th Prosecutor Generals office Mami K.A. had been accepted Muhtarov A.J. with the petition for protest of decision Ust-Kamenogorsk of city court from September, 04th, 2008 and the board decision on civil cases of the East Kazakhstan regional court from October, 14th, 2008 on a civil case under its claim to Limited liability Company «Zhelmaja", Kydyrbekov A.A., Tajbolatov T.Z.'s third parties about material damage compensation.
By studying of materials of business it is established, that along the line on a route «Ust Kamenogorsk - Almaty» on a motor vehicle «Mercedes Benz», because of a carrier – Limited liability Company " Zhelmaja ", the applicant has lost luggage: a bag in which there were things and money resources in this connection asked court to collect the sum of the caused material damage.
The fact of loss of luggage of Limited liability Company " Zhelmaja " has been confirmed during proceeding and not challenged by the respondent, but the claim is satisfied by court only regarding collecting of cost of the lost things, in other part in the claim is given up in connection with unrepresented finding proofs in a bag of money resources, and also referring to that at planting in the bus the claimant did not declare value of cargo.
Taking into account requirements of article 705 of the Civil Code, inadequate execution of Limited liability Company "Zhelmaja" of the obligations taken on, namely - luggage loss, grants Muhtarova A.J.'s right to demand application to the respondent of measures of civil-law responsibility.
By court it is not considered, that according to point 12 of article 20 of Law RK «About motor transport» the passenger has the right to declare value of luggage at delivery to transportation. The announcement of value of luggage is not included into the list of duties of the passenger.
Resulted by Muhtarova A.J., and also witnesses of the proof and the indication about a finding in the lost luggage, besides things, money resources, court are not accepted.
Thereupon the assistant to the Prosecutor Generals office in supervising board of the East Kazakhstan regional court directs on November, 04th, 2009 the protest about change of the judicial certificates which have taken place on data: cancellation and removal of the new decision regarding Muhtarova A.J.'s requirements about collecting from Limited liability Company "Zhelmaja" of the lost sum of money.
On January, 11th, 2010 the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Mustafin K.S. with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation of his son Mustafin Since a sentence of Atbasarsky regional court on June, 17th, 2008 for armed assault on Baizakovs family.
Earlier similar complaint has been considered with studying of materials of criminal case and is recognized by unreasonable about what the answer by the assistant to the Prosecutor Generals office about absence of the bases for entering of the supervising protest is given the author of the reference.
Studying of materials of criminal case establishes, that fault of the armed assault condemned in fulfillment for the purpose of plunder of property Baizakovs in the large size, by a group of persons on preliminary arrangement, to illegal penetration into premises, with weapon application is completely confirmed by set of the proofs investigated in judicial session, namely: indications of victims, reports of investigatory actions, the conclusions of examinations, material evidences and other materials of business.
Punishment to the condemned is appointed taking into account weight of the committed crime and person, according to requirements of item 52 CC and within article 179 sanction p.3 the item "in" CC.
The infringements of norms of the criminally-remedial legislation attracting cancellation or change of judicial certificates, on business it is not revealed.
The sentence of Atbasar regional court from June, 17th, 2008 concerning Mustafin S. is lawful and proved.
The judicial certificate was checked by courts of appeal and supervising instances, including the Supreme Court, and is recognized by proved.
By results of consideration of the reference to the applicant it is given refusing answer signed by the Prosecutor Generals office.
By results of studying of criminal case arguments of the defender have found the acknowledgement and the Prosecutor Generals office in supervising instance of the Supreme Court brings the protest as supervision as the court of the first instance has not found out the questions, concerning Hodenov A.M.'s office powers and as a result has incorrectly stated a legal estimation to his actions.
***
On January, 11th, 2010 on reception of the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan Mami K.A. there was Citizen Oshakbaev ZH with the complaint about disagreement with taken place judicial decisions concerning brothers Achayevs.
As it is established, the verdict of guilty of the South Kazakhstan regional court decided with participation of jurymen from April, 23rd, 2009 concerning brothers Achayevs, is left on July, 15th, 2009 without change by the board decision on criminal cases of the Supreme Court of Republic of Kazakhstan.
According to item 577 CPC revision as supervision of the verdict of guilty decided with participation of jurymen, and also the court decision in connection with necessity of application of the criminal law on more grave crime in view of softness of punishment or on other bases involving deterioration of position condemned, and also revision of the verdict of "not guilty" or the court decision about the criminal case termination is not supposed.
In this connection, possibilities for protest of the taken place judicial certificates as supervision are not available.
The decision of the inspector Bajdibeksk PDIA the South Kazakhstan area from October, 1st, 2009 about manufacture stay on the criminal case raised upon destruction of another's property, made by an arson, Prosecutor Generals office on February, 2nd, 2010 it is cancelled, that is in this part arguments of the applicant are satisfied.
Prosecutor Generals office also had been cancelled decision DIA of the South Kazakhstan area about refusal in excitation of criminal case concerning officials Bajdibeksky RDIA from January, 21st, 2009, upon untimely withdrawal at Achayevs fowling piece employees of RDIA and about not work carrying out on preventive maintenance of fulfillment of offences.
The specified criminal case and materials have been directed the public prosecutor of the South Kazakhstan area for the organization of supervision of legality of preliminary investigation and inquiry.
Now criminal case concerning Achayev N under item 96 p.2 items «a, b, c» CC is considered in essence in the South Kazakhstan regional court which course of consideration is on the control. On the accepted measures it is informed the applicant.
***
On January, 11th, 2010 the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Mahanbetzhanov A.A., the ex - employee of police, with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation by a court sentence № 2 Almaty areas of Astana from March, 13th, 2009 for hooliganism fulfillment.
By results of studying by the criminal case Prosecutor Generals office it is established, that the fault of the hooliganism condemned in fulfillment with violence application to Abdaliev А and Bakylbekova G is completely confirmed by set of the proofs investigated in judicial session, namely: indications of victims, reports of investigatory actions, the conclusions of examinations, material evidences and other materials of business.
Punishment to the condemned is appointed taking into account weight of the committed crime and its person, according to requirements of item 52 CC and within article 257 sanction p.2 CC.
The infringements of norms of the criminally-remedial legislation attracting cancellation or change of judicial certificates, on business it is not revealed.
The court sentence № 2 Almaty areas of Astana from March, 13th, 2009 concerning Mahanbetzhanova A.A. are lawful and proved.
By results of consideration of the reference the answer about groundlessness of his complaint is given the applicant.
***
On criminal case concerning Karchu I, mother whom has addressed with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation of the daughter to the Head of the state as the crow flies, the Prosecutor Generals office has been brought the protest on the taken place judicial certificates of courts of Astana. On criminal cases of the Supreme Court of Republic Kazakhstan on February, 9th, 2010 the protest is completely satisfied by judicial supervising board, criminal case is directed on new judicial consideration.
***
On January, 11th, 2010 Prosecutor General of RK Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Kikbaev B.Z. with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation by his sentence of court of Zajsansky area of the East Kazakhstan area from March, 11th, 2009 upon attempt at bribery.
The similar complaint of the applicant has been considered earlier with studying of materials of criminal case following the results of which the answer by the assistant to the Prosecutor Generals office, that the bases to protest the decisions accepted by court has been directed the applicant.
During studying of affairs of wine of the applicant about attempt at bribery to the senior inspector of Financial police on K.Zharlygakovoj's Zajsansky site it is supported at judicial session by set of in details studied proofs, indications of witnesses, reports on a recognition and familiarizing of proofs, the conclusions it is judicial-video phonographic examination.
Criminal acts condemned by court are qualified correctly. Punishment is appointed according to requirements of article 52 CC taking into account public danger of the committed crime and all circumstances of business.
Infringements of the criminally-remedial legislation for cancellation of a sentence of court or its change are not available.
Sentence of Zajsansky regional court from March, 17th, 2009 and the board decision on criminal cases of regional court of the East Kazakhstan area are taken out lawfully. The bases for protest entering on the accepted decisions of court on criminal case are not available.
The answer following the results of complaint consideration is directed to Kikbaev B. signed by the Prosecutor Generals office.
*****
On January, 11th, 2010 the Prosecutor General of Republic of Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Malshybaev B.S. with the petition for disagreement with the judicial decisions which have taken place concerning Tamenov V.K, the court of №2 of Families condemned by a sentence from August, 11th, 2009 under item 104 p.2 the item «d» CC by 3 years of imprisonment with application of item 63 CC 2 years are conditional with a trial period. Item 257 is excluded from charge p.3 CC, as unduly made.
Tamenov B.K.'s by court it is recognized by guilty of a deliberate trespass the suffered Malshybaev M. A's to health of the average weight made from hooligan promptings.
Studying of materials of criminal case has shown that the court has excluded item 257 p.3 CC as the crime arm (instrument) - knuckleduster during investigation has not been established.
However, having specified in a sentence, that the crime tool on business is not established, the court has unreasonably drawn a conclusion on a full exception of charge of item 257 CC.
Out of a legal estimation of court there was a fact of beating of Malshybaev M. A the condemned Tamenov V.K. together with the unknown person in which relation business materials are allocated in separate manufacture, before an input in billiard club in the afternoon days that allows to draw a conclusion on hooliganism Tamenov V.K.'s fulfillment in a group of persons on preliminary arrangement.
Thereupon, the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan on the present business brings the protest in the Supreme Court about cancellation of all judicial decisions which have taken place concerning Tamenov V.K.
***
On October, 7th, 2009 by the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception it has been accepted Tukenov Zh with the complaint about disagreement with the appointed measure of punishment concerning her brother - Segizbayev А.B, the Tarbagataj regional court condemned by a sentence from 19.06.2008. For causing of heavy harm to health (item 103 p.1 CC RK) by 3 years of imprisonment.
By studying of materials of criminal case it is established, that Segizbayev I, 1955 of a birth, earlier we do not judge, in a work and residence place it is characterized positively. After fulfillment Segizbayev I. of a crime, his wife has died, two minor children remained without care of parents.
Under such circumstances, appointed Segizbayev court punishment in the form of 3 years of real imprisonment is excessively severe.
Thereupon, the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan on the present business brings the protest as supervision in supervising board of the Supreme court about cancellation of the decision of supervising board of the East Kazakhstan regional court and оставления without change of the decision of board on criminal cases of the same court concerning Segizbayev regarding application to it of a conditional measure of punishment.
Similarly, within the limits of work on protection of constitutional laws and freedom of citizens, Kaliev M. K and Dementyev V. G's reference about cancellation of decision of Akim of Astana about garage legalization has been satisfied arrived on July, 7th, 2009 from personal reception of the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic of Kazakhstan of Mami K.A. In supervising board of court of Astana on corresponding civil case on the instructions of the Prosecutor Generals office the protest which by results of judicial consideration is satisfied has been brought, the taken place judicial acts have been cancelled with a civil case direction on new judicial consideration.
***
On reception on October, 7th Prosecutor Generals office Mami K.A. accepts Shahraj K.I. with the petition for acceptance of measures to the authorized state bodies of Astana because of their inactivity in a question of an illegal pulling down of garage.
It is established, that the ground area on which the garage (garage co-operative society "Steppe") the applicant is located, is in borders of the site which is subject to withdrawal for the state needs on the basis of the decision of akimat of a city.
In turn, by Akimat the given ground area is given the company-builder for carrying out of inspection, prospecting works and designing of a multiform inhabited complex under condition of the conclusion by it of contracts on conditions of indemnification with each of proprietors of the real estate which is on the given ground area.
At the same time, between the Applicant and the builder the agreement on the price of the withdrawn ground area and the property located on it is not reached, owing to what Shahraj K.I.'s indemnification has not been paid.
Along with it is established, that the builder in infringement of requirements of item 86 of the Ground code of Republic of Kazakhstan limits the rights of proprietors of garages to use of the ground areas to their definitive repayment by installation of a metal protection on perimeter of garage co-operative society.
Thereupon, the Office of Public Prosecutor of the city of Astana to Акима cities brings representation about elimination of infringements of legality with the requirement of restoration of the broken rights of proprietors of not redeemed garages.
***
On reception on October, 06th Prosecutor Generals office Mami K.A. had been accepted Muhtarov A.J. with the petition for protest of decision Ust-Kamenogorsk of city court from September, 04th, 2008 and the board decision on civil cases of the East Kazakhstan regional court from October, 14th, 2008 on a civil case under its claim to Limited liability Company «Zhelmaja", Kydyrbekov A.A., Tajbolatov T.Z.'s third parties about material damage compensation.
By studying of materials of business it is established, that along the line on a route «Ust Kamenogorsk - Almaty» on a motor vehicle «Mercedes Benz», because of a carrier – Limited liability Company " Zhelmaja ", the applicant has lost luggage: a bag in which there were things and money resources in this connection asked court to collect the sum of the caused material damage.
The fact of loss of luggage of Limited liability Company " Zhelmaja " has been confirmed during proceeding and not challenged by the respondent, but the claim is satisfied by court only regarding collecting of cost of the lost things, in other part in the claim is given up in connection with unrepresented finding proofs in a bag of money resources, and also referring to that at planting in the bus the claimant did not declare value of cargo.
Taking into account requirements of article 705 of the Civil Code, inadequate execution of Limited liability Company "Zhelmaja" of the obligations taken on, namely - luggage loss, grants Muhtarova A.J.'s right to demand application to the respondent of measures of civil-law responsibility.
By court it is not considered, that according to point 12 of article 20 of Law RK «About motor transport» the passenger has the right to declare value of luggage at delivery to transportation. The announcement of value of luggage is not included into the list of duties of the passenger.
Resulted by Muhtarova A.J., and also witnesses of the proof and the indication about a finding in the lost luggage, besides things, money resources, court are not accepted.
Thereupon the assistant to the Prosecutor Generals office in supervising board of the East Kazakhstan regional court directs on November, 04th, 2009 the protest about change of the judicial certificates which have taken place on data: cancellation and removal of the new decision regarding Muhtarova A.J.'s requirements about collecting from Limited liability Company "Zhelmaja" of the lost sum of money.
***
On January, 11th, 2010 the Prosecutor Generals office of Republic Kazakhstan Mami K.A. on personal reception had been accepted Mustafin K.S. with the complaint about unreasonable condemnation of his son Mustafin Since a sentence of Atbasarsky regional court on June, 17th, 2008 for armed assault on Baizakovs family.
Earlier similar complaint has been considered with studying of materials of criminal case and is recognized by unreasonable about what the answer by the assistant to the Prosecutor Generals office about absence of the bases for entering of the supervising protest is given the author of the reference.
Studying of materials of criminal case establishes, that fault of the armed assault condemned in fulfillment for the purpose of plunder of property Baizakovs in the large size, by a group of persons on preliminary arrangement, to illegal penetration into premises, with weapon application is completely confirmed by set of the proofs investigated in judicial session, namely: indications of victims, reports of investigatory actions, the conclusions of examinations, material evidences and other materials of business.
Punishment to the condemned is appointed taking into account weight of the committed crime and person, according to requirements of item 52 CC and within article 179 sanction p.3 the item "in" CC.
The infringements of norms of the criminally-remedial legislation attracting cancellation or change of judicial certificates, on business it is not revealed.
The sentence of Atbasar regional court from June, 17th, 2008 concerning Mustafin S. is lawful and proved.
The judicial certificate was checked by courts of appeal and supervising instances, including the Supreme Court, and is recognized by proved.
By results of consideration of the reference to the applicant it is given refusing answer signed by the Prosecutor Generals office.
