The Tashkent City Court has moved into the debate phase of the appeal in the criminal case against entrepreneur Sanjar Karimov, widely known as 'Real Sanjik'. During the September 25 hearing, defense speeches were delivered by six lawyers representing Karimov, as well as by the lawyer for the victim, Feruza Rakhmatullaeva. The proceedings were reported by Gazeta correspondent Mirolim Isajonov, who attended the hearing.
At the latest hearing, the defendant Sanjar Karimov was removed from the courtroom by order of the presiding judge. This followed an incident during the victim Feruza Rakhmatullaeva's statement, when Karimov reacted to her crying with words to the effect of 'Don't put on a performance.' The presiding judge assessed this as contempt of court.
Tursunali Akbarov, press secretary of the Tashkent City Court, explained in an interview with media representatives that the procedural rules for conducting court hearings are established by the Criminal Procedure Code. According to him, Karimov had twice previously violated order during court hearings. On the second occasion, the presiding judge gave him a strict warning and stated that if order was violated again, the case could be considered without his participation. 'As you can see, today the defendant again violated order in the courtroom. After he openly demonstrated disrespect for the court, taking into account the previous warning, the presiding judge removed the defendant from the courtroom,' said the press secretary. Akbarov emphasized that in court proceedings, parties have obligations alongside their rights.
One of Sanjar Karimov's lawyers, Mansur Abduraimov, told journalists that the appellate panel for criminal cases of the Tashkent City Court is reviewing not the indictment but the first-instance verdict — the decision of the Mirzo Ulugbek District Court issued on May 8, 2026, against Karimov. 'Sanjar Karimov is serving under a court verdict, not an indictment. Therefore, we are expressing our opinion regarding the verdict,' the lawyer said. Abduraimov emphasized that the defense has the right to point out provisions in the verdict that contradict legislation, and he focused on the third episode charged against Karimov.
According to him, the verdict states that during investigative actions, in a desk drawer in the office where Karimov lived, inside a 'Parlament' tobacco product box, a polyethylene bag containing a brown, pungent, waxy substance was found, along with a green, pungent, herbaceous substance wrapped in money and white paper, and a smoking device — a bong. However, according to the lawyer, the verdict does not specify exactly what narcotic substance these were or their quantity. 'The question arises: what is the brown, pungent, waxy substance wrapped in a polyethylene bag? Hashish, marijuana, hash, opium? If the name is not indicated, what is the quantity?' says Mansur Abduraimov.
According to him, the quantity of a narcotic substance is assessed depending on its type, so it is important to indicate the name and exact quantity of the substance. 'This was not established in the verdict. Even if it was established, it was not written down. Neither the name nor the quantity of the narcotic substance is indicated. But for some reason it is qualified under Part 2 of Article 273 of the Criminal Code,' the lawyer says. He also addressed the expertise in the first-instance court. According to him, the expert stated that a narcotic substance was presented for examination, but because it also contained tobacco, he could not separate the pure narcotic substance from the mixture. 'The expert said that a narcotic substance was presented to him for examination. But there was tobacco inside. "I could not separate it," he said. The court cited this testimony in the verdict but did not evaluate it,' the lawyer says.
According to Abduraimov, after the appellate court resumed the judicial investigation on August 21, the defense asked for clarification of these circumstances. In particular, motions were filed to summon experts and operational officers who participated in the search, to hear their testimony, and to assess the admissibility of evidence. 'All ten motions contained a request to clarify this issue. We asked to summon experts and operational officers who participated in the search, and to assess the admissibility of evidence. But the court rejected them,' he says. The lawyer noted that during the appellate process, this issue was not clarified for two months.
According to him, at the August 21 hearing, the prosecutor also acknowledged that there was merit in the defense's objections. In his speech, the prosecutor indicated that the court could bring the remaining issues in the verdict regarding the name and quantity of the narcotic substance into compliance with the law. 'How can something that was not established be brought into compliance? If it had been established, it could have been added. But I am surprised how something that was not established can be brought into compliance,' the lawyer says. He also stated that no narcotic substance was found in Sanjar Karimov's body.
Sanjar Karimov has appealed to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, claiming violations of law and his rights during the judicial process. Lawyer Mansur Abduraimov emphasized that these appeals were not made to exert external pressure on the court. According to him, the conclusion of the National Center for Human Rights, signed by the head of the organization, Akmal Saidov, also notes violations of law and constitutional rights during the search. 'Because this document exists, both his relatives and he himself are appealing to the UN. This does not mean pressure on the court. Since such a conclusion was given by the National Center, an appeal is being made asking, "Will you also consider this issue?"' the lawyer says.
Tashkent City Court press secretary Tursunali Akbarov noted that the defendant's appeal to international organizations is his right and is treated with respect. However, according to him, incidents committed in Uzbekistan, including criminal cases, are considered on the basis of the country's legislation. According to him, in this criminal case there are attempts on social networks to artificially politicize the situation. Akbarov noted that if any document or response comes from international organizations, it will be advisory in nature. The press secretary also addressed the conclusion of the National Center for Human Rights, emphasizing that it is not a procedural document and is advisory in nature. 'The center's leadership gave its conclusion based on the applicant's application and complaint. This conclusion is also advisory in nature and will ultimately be considered by the court, and an appropriate legal assessment will be given,' said Akbarov.
The court has announced a recess until September 28. Recall that on May 8, the Mirzo Ulugbek District Court for Criminal Cases completed its hearings in the criminal case against Sanjar Karimov. That day, Karimov was sentenced to 5 years in prison. The court found him guilty of fraud, threats of killing or violence, and storage of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances.
Source: www.gazeta.uz