Паст инфо

The representatives of the injured party on the assault case in ‘Harsnaqar’ restaurant on June 17 Tigran Yegoryan, Lousine Hakobyan and Vahe Grigoryan filed a complaint to the RA Criminal Court of Appeal against the decision of the Court of Center and Norq Marash administrative districts of Yerevan from November 16. The Court, under the presidency of the Judge Gagik Khandanyan, rejected the complaint against the preliminary investigation body, the Police, and the Prosecutor’s Office realizing judicial supervision over the legality of the preliminary investigation.

Tigran Yegoryan informed the reporter of ‘Pastinfo’ that they demand to overrule the indicated decision and satisfy the demand based on the effectiveness of justice.

Let us remind that the injured party representatives demanded to cancel the decision of the investigator, by which their requests aimed at correcting the blanks and violations during the investigation were rejected.  The injured party demanded to force ‘the return of the case with blanks and violations to the investigator for an additional investigation’.

According to the injured party representatives, the biggest blank of the preliminary investigation body is that it was not revealed exactly whose hint or hints caused Vahe Avetyan’s death, thus ‘the murder of the victim was not revealed’. The party is sure that the person guilty in the crime was not disclosed due to the ‘rapid end of the preliminary investigation’: 5 people out of 6 disclosed were body-guards and they could not take actions without the assignment or connivance of the restaurant owner Rouben Hayrapetyan.

The injured party insists on restarting of the case in the SIS in order to reveal the actions and motives of the officials.

Arthur Davtyan, carrying out judicial supervision on the case found the complaint unreasoned, not corresponding to the requirements of criminal proceedings code and as a subject to rejection. He explained that all 6 defendants were introduced the same charge, since they intentionally tried to cause damage to a group of people.

According to him the end of the case was not rapid; the case proceedings took place within reasonable timeframe, which is a requirement of international norms of rights and public demand.

A. Davtyan added that part of the requests of the injured party concerns revealing of other possible participants of the crime.

Автор Factinfo