Complaint against the Action / Inaction of the Inquiry Officer
To the Prosecutor's Office of the Almaly District of Almaty
from attorney: Galymzhan Turlybekovich Sarzhanov
Law Firm “Zakon i Pravo”
BIN 201240021767
79 Abylai Khan Ave., Office 304, Almaty.
info@zakonpravo.kz / www.zakonpravo.kz
+7 708 971 78 58.
In the interests of: GAA
IIN ....
Complaint
against the action/inaction of the inquiry officer of the Inquiry Department of the Almaly District Police Department of the Almaty Police Department, Nazіr U.B.
A criminal case registered in the ERDR under No. 257511031000798 under Article 317, Part 1 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, based on the statement of Orazbayeva A.T. against VA.A. and Ga A.A., is pending before the Inquiry Department of the Almaly District Police Department.
Earlier, the senior inquiry officer of the Inquiry Department of the Almaly District Police Department of Almaty, Police Captain Nazіr U.B. (hereinafter – the inquiry officer), in the said criminal case, guided by Articles 270 and 272 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter – the CPC), issued a resolution on the appointment of a commission forensic medical examination. We were familiarized with the Resolution on June 24, 2025.
According to Article 272, Part 5 of the CPC, participants in the proceedings defending their own rights and interests or the rights and interests they represent shall submit in writing to the body conducting the criminal proceedings the questions on which, in their opinion, the expert should provide an opinion, indicate the objects of examination, and also name a person who may be invited as an expert. The body conducting the criminal proceedings shall not have the right to refuse to appoint an examination, except where the questions submitted for its resolution are not related to the criminal case or the subject matter of the forensic examination. In case of refusal to grant the motion, the person conducting the pre-trial investigation shall issue a reasoned resolution within three days from the date of receipt of the motion.
On June 27, 2025, I submitted a motion to put additional questions before the expert, where additional questions to the expert were indicated, in particular, I requested that a forensic medical examination also be appointed in respect of the doctor of the Maxillofacial Surgery Department of City Clinical Hospital No. 5 of Almaty, Tarasov R.E.
However, the inquiry officer, violating the deadlines for resolving motions provided for in Article 99, Part 4 of the CPC, responded to the motion on July 7, 2025.
Moreover, the inquiry officer unlawfully issued a resolution refusing to grant the motion, referring to the fact that a commission forensic medical examination based on medical documents had already been appointed in the criminal case, and documents seized from City Clinical Hospital No. 5 “Maxillofacial Surgery Department” had been submitted for the examination.
We disagree with the Resolution of the inquiry officer dated July 7, 2025 on refusal to grant the motion and consider the Resolution unfounded and unreasoned on the following grounds:
Firstly: In our motion, we requested that additional questions be included;
Secondly: According to the materials of the criminal case, on October 17, 2024, at City Clinical Hospital No. 5, Maxillofacial Surgery Department, in Almaty, patient OA.T. underwent surgical intervention performed by doctor TR.E., which included extraction of tooth 2.7 (27), removal of filling material from the maxillary sinus, curettage of the tooth socket, and hemostasis.
Considering that this intervention, by its nature, was surgical and was performed after dental treatment provided by Gym A.A., it could have caused its own complications, distorted the picture of the pathology, or affected the subsequent state of health of the victim OA.T.
In connection with the necessity to ensure a comprehensive, complete and objective examination of the circumstances of the case, on the basis of Articles 24, 270 and 272 of the CPC of the Republic of Kazakhstan, for the purpose of differentiating the causes of the adverse consequences and also identifying a possible causal relationship with the actions of the doctors of the Maxillofacial Surgery Department No. 5, we requested that a forensic medical examination also be appointed in respect of the doctor of City Clinical Hospital No. 5, Maxillofacial Surgery Department, of Almaty, TR.E.
According to Article 10 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan (hereinafter – the CPC), inquiry officers, when conducting criminal proceedings, are obliged to strictly comply with the requirements of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, this Code, and other regulatory legal acts specified in Article 1 of this Code.
Accordingly, we are applying to you, exercising the right provided for in Article 100 of the CPC of the Republic of Kazakhstan, which states that decisions and actions of a person conducting a pre-trial investigation, a prosecutor, a court or a judge may be appealed in accordance with the procedure established by this Code by participants in the proceedings, as well as by individuals and legal entities if the procedural actions being conducted affect their interests.
According to Article 99, Part 4 of the CPC of the Republic of Kazakhstan, a motion shall be considered and resolved immediately after it is filed. In cases where immediate decision-making on the motion is impossible, it shall be resolved no later than three days from the date of filing.
Pursuant to Article 105 of the CPC of the Republic of Kazakhstan, complaints filed by persons defending their own rights and interests or the rights and interests they represent against actions (inaction) and decisions of persons conducting the pre-trial investigation shall be submitted to the head of the investigative department, the head of the inquiry body, the prosecutor or the court.
According to Article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On the Prosecutor's Office”, the Prosecutor's Office, on behalf of the state, exercises, within the limits and forms established by law, supreme supervision over compliance with the law on the territory of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Pursuant to Article 5 of the Law, the Prosecutor's Office exercises supreme supervision (hereinafter – supervision) over legality.
According to Paragraph 3 of Article 58 of the CPC of the Republic of Kazakhstan, where there are grounds and in the manner prescribed by this Code, the prosecutor shall have the right, by his/her resolution, to take cases into his/her own proceedings and personally conduct the investigation, while exercising the powers of an investigator. Supervision over the legality of the pre-trial investigation shall be exercised by the prosecutor authorized to do so.
Based on the foregoing and in accordance with Article 105 of the CPC of the Republic of Kazakhstan,
I request:
· To cancel the decision of the senior inquiry officer of the Inquiry Department of the Almaly District Police Department of Almaty, Police Captain Nazіr U.B., refusing to grant the motion dated June 28, 2025;
· To grant the attorney's motion to put additional questions before the expert.
Attorney / Defense Counsel:
Sarzhanov G.T.
Attention!
Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.
For more information, please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085.
Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office Court Cases
