Military Court Sentences Corporal and Two Others in Homicide Case of Zhasulan Abdimanap

The Military Court has announced its verdict against Corporal Murod Abdizhamilov and two others in the case of the homicide of their fellow villager, 19-year-old Zhasulan Abdimanap, Orda.kz reports.

Investigators allege the defendants forced the victim to take out loans for them.

How The Case Unfolded

The incident took place in February 2025 in the Saryagash district of the Turkistan region. Abdimanap left home and did not return; two days later, he was found with 14 stab wounds.

Only Abdizhamilov was charged under Article 99 of the Criminal Code (“Homicide”), while his friend Dias Ibragimov and partner Adina Mamaeva were charged under Article 434 (“Failure to report a serious crime”). Abdizhamilov denied guilt and claimed Ibragimov promised him 10 million tenge to take all the blame, a statement repeated in his final remarks and supported by his defense.

Lawyer Gulzhan Abdykalikova, representing Abdizhamilov, criticized lawyers for the victim’s family:

The representatives of the victim stated on social networks that my client should be given the 'ceiling' (the maximum term provided for by Article 99 is life imprisonment - Ed.), that he should be given the 'top', they accuse him. They spread this information with an accusatory bias throughout Kazakhstan and the whole world. But the defendant, until his guilt is proven by the court, is considered innocent, and he is not obliged to prove his innocence.

She asked the court to issue a private order to the Almaty Chamber of Legal Advisers for two representatives of the victim. The court did not grant the petition.

Dias Ibragimov and Adina Mamaeva fully admitted their guilt in failing to report the crime. At the same time, Ibragimov did not comment on Abdizhamilov's statements, did not refute or confirm his promise to give 10 million tenge for the corporal to take the blame.

Meanwhile, the lawyers representing the interests of the victim spoke about the “aul mafia,” which, according to them, is perceived as the norm in rural regions.

The older youth "burden" the younger ones, those who have barely turned 18–19. They take money from them, calling it "respect for elders", and under various pretexts force them to take out loans and microloans for them. 

This, they argued, was the cause of Abdimanap’s death. According to investigators, he took out loans and credits and gave the money to Abdizhamilov and his friends. The corporal promised to return the money, invited Abdimanap to meet, but there, according to investigators, he killed him to avoid repaying the debts.

Sentence Handed Down

Judge Tamara Korolevskaya delivered the verdict:

To find Murod Abdizhamilov guilty of criminal offenses under Part 1 of Article 99 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan ("Homicide") and paragraph 4 of Part 2 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan ("Fraud"). To finally sentence him to 15 years of imprisonment. He will serve his sentence in a medium-security penal institution.

Ibragimov received a four-year sentence, reduced under the “On amnesty for the 30th anniversary of the Constitution” law to two years and eight months, while Mamayeva, with a prior conviction, was sentenced to four years without amnesty.

Abdizhamilov must also pay 20 million tenge in moral damages to the victim’s family.

The victim’s mother, Raikhan Zhamalova, said:

This is a very short term - the court gave Abdizhamilov 15 years, under Article 99 the penalty is 20-25 years. But they gave him practically the minimum. And he stabbed my son 14 times! Dias Ibragimov - he not only did not report, he is an accomplice, he saw that my son was wounded, bleeding, and did not help, did nothing. And they gave him four years, and even reduced it by two years and eight months under the amnesty. He will be released soon and will again shake money out of our children with his friends.

She added that the killing was premeditated and that other individuals involved were not brought in as suspects or witnesses. She also stated that the defendants’ families have not apologized or assisted in repaying the loans taken in her son’s name, which the family is still paying off.

Original Author: Anastasia Prilepskaya