50 year old Davit Mnatsakanyan was sentenced to four year imprisonment for knifing his villager. According to the case materials he and Davit Hazroyan were in a close relationship till that happened, when Mnatsakanyan’s wife left the house without reason.
Davit Mnatsakanyan suspecting a possible relationship between his wife and Davit Hazroyan demanded from the latter not to come to their home. Davit Mnatsakanyan’s mother died in May 2015. Hazroyan wanted to sympathize them but Davit Sargsyan kicked him out. Later on Hazroyan seek explanations.
On 25 May, the former friends meet in the village center. Mantsakanyan did not want Hazroyan notice him and joined his villagers who were playing cards. But Hazroyan saw him and in a rough and offending manner offered to have a tête-à-tête. In his turn Mnatsakanyan took off his knife and hit Hazroyan. Those present interfered, Hazroyan was transferred to the hospital and operated on.
Davit Mnatsakanyan was charged and arrested under the provisions of Article 112, Part 1 of the Criminal Code. But 15 days later the measure of restraint was changed with cognizance not to leave. The fact that he had four children in his care and the poor social conditions of his family were taken into account. He accepted his guilt, regretted, was not sentenced before and has a positive description.1
Vahe Khalatyan, Judge of the First Instance Court of General Jurisdiction of Armavir marz
Considering the mentioned above mitigating circumstances, as well as the absence of the aggravating circumstances prosecutor Andranik Sahakyan solicited
a punishment according to Article 70 of the RA Criminal Code and conditionally not to apply punishment and assign a trial period.
By the way, during the trial, Davit Hazroyan testified that he did not have any compliant and demands from Mnatsakanyan and asked for a lenient punishment for his villager.
However, the First Instance Court of Armavir marz under the presiding Judge Vahe Khalatyan sentenced Davit Mnatsakanyan to four years imprisonment and did not apply Article 70 of the Criminal Code, concluding that there was no justification that the defendant’s correction would be possible without serving the sentence.
Advocate Daniel Gevorgyan
By this decision published on 15 December 2015, the measure of restraint was changed and Davit Mnatsakanyan was taken into custody in the courtroom. Currently defendant’s children are left without parental care and live in the worst conditions. Recently, Panorama.am website referred to children’s bad conditions.
Currently two appeals have been submitted to the Court of Appeals; one from Prosecutor Andranik Sahakyan and the other from Mnatsakanyan’s defender Daniel Gevorgyan. Appeals are similar as both the defendant and the prosecutor requested to apply Article 70 of the RA Criminal Code and conditionally not to apply punishment and assign a trial period.
Taking into account the existing practice, Davit Mnatsakanyan’s case is unique. “This is a unique case because Prosecution rarely requests a conditional imprisonment in such cases”- Davit Gevorgyan mentioned in the interview with Iravaban.am. By the way, in case of committed crime under the features of Article 112, Part 1 of the RA Criminal Code a punishment of 3-7 years is applied.
This case is also unique because the prosecutor appeals the decision of Court in the Court of Appeals. In practice, prosecutors usually request for more severe punishment and appeal the decision of Court in case of lenient punishment.
Mher Armaghanyan, Judge of the Criminal Court of Appeals of the RA
Advocate Daniel Gevorgyan said that on 23 February, the first court hearing was held in the Court of Appeals where the appeals were presented. At the next sitting he will present the documents on Davit Mnatsakanyan family’s bad social conditions, as well as documents that two of four children have problems with health. Then, most likely, the Court will go to consulting room to make a decision.
The Defender stressed Davit Hazroyan’s opinion: “The injured does not have any compliant, problems and envious relationships, they reconciled with each other. He also asked the First Instance Court to be lenient. He repeated the same in the Court of Appeals. As the defendant did not have the possibility to solve all health problems of the injured, his relatives took care of that and therefore there is no need in civil suit”.
Interesting is the fact that Davit Mnatsakanyan did not have defender in the First Instance Court. Lawyer Daniel Gevorgyan said as much as he knows that a public defender was involved in case but Davit Mnatsakanyan refused his help. According to our information Davit Mnatsakanyan’s children had paid for the advocate’s services with the donated money.
Currently, Davit Mnatsakanyan and his four children are looking forward for the humanitarian decision of the Court of Appeals.
Main photo: Panorama.am
