The Tashkent City Criminal Court (Yangihaet district) examined a criminal case in a closed hearing concerning a defendant accused of knowingly placing another person at risk of HIV infection. The court heard testimony from the defendant, the victim, their legal representatives, and the state prosecutor, and reviewed investigative materials, expert findings, and other evidence gathered during the pre-trial investigation.
According to the case file, the defendant had previously been officially registered as HIV-positive and had been warned by medical authorities about the obligation to avoid behaviours that could transmit the infection to others. Despite this, he maintained contact with the victim, and in September 2025 the two met and spent time together in Tashkent. During this period, they engaged in consensual sexual relations without the use of protective measures, which resulted in the victim being exposed to a risk of HIV infection.
In court proceedings, the defendant acknowledged his diagnosis and confirmed that he had been informed of the risks associated with transmitting HIV to others. He stated that he had known the victim for several years and that their relationship had developed into a romantic attachment over time. He described their encounters in 2025, including meetings at rented accommodation, and admitted that unprotected sexual intercourse had taken place with mutual consent. He expressed remorse for his actions and requested leniency.
The victim also provided testimony describing the development of the relationship over time, including repeated meetings and periods spent together in different locations. She confirmed that she had engaged in consensual sexual relations with the defendant and stated that she was aware of his HIV status at the time. She further indicated that she did not have any civil claims against the defendant.
The court assessed the defendant’s actions in light of the applicable criminal provisions concerning knowingly exposing another person to the risk of HIV infection. It found that his conduct constituted a criminal offence, as he was aware of his medical condition and the associated legal obligation not to engage in conduct that could endanger others, yet still proceeded with unprotected sexual activity.
When determining the sentence, the court considered mitigating circumstances, including the defendant’s admission of guilt, expressions of remorse, and the absence of claims from the victim. No aggravating circumstances were established. The court also referred to constitutional principles of proportionality and relevant guidance from the Supreme Court regarding individualized sentencing.
As a result, the court imposed a sentence of four years’ restriction of liberty rather than imprisonment. The defendant was ordered to remain under supervision, comply with movement restrictions, and adhere to behavioural conditions, including limitations on changing residence, participation in public events, consumption of alcohol in public places, and travel outside Tashkent without authorization from supervising authorities. The court also specified that the defendant’s compliance would be monitored by the relevant internal affairs authorities, and that failure to comply could result in modification of the sentence to a stricter form of punishment.
The court further clarified that any civil claims for material or moral damages could be pursued separately through civil proceedings. An appeal against the judgment could be filed within the statutory time limits following the issuance of the decision.
