Man who stole seven chicks sentenced to more than 10 years in prison in Andijan

A man in Andijan region who broke into his neighbor’s home and stole seven chicks after using violence against a minor has been sentenced to 10 years and two months in prison. QALAMPIR.UZ reviewed the court ruling.

According to the case materials, the 39-year-old man, born in Baliqchi district of Andijan region, entered a neighbor’s home with the intent to commit theft at around 1:30 p.m. on May 3, 2025. After encountering the homeowner’s underage son in the yard, he attacked the child.

The defendant used violence against the minor, beating him, choking him by the neck, and causing serious bodily injuries.

He then forcibly stole seven chicks from a coop in the yard and fled the scene.

It was established that the man had previously been convicted seven times for various crimes and had served prison sentences.

Under a verdict issued by the Oltinkul District Criminal Court on November 11, 2025, the defendant was found guilty under Article 164, Part 3, subparagraphs “a, v, g” (robbery committed by a dangerous recidivist) of the Criminal Code and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. Taking into account Articles 60 and 61 of the Criminal Code, the final sentence was set at 10 years and two months of imprisonment. In addition, under Article 34 (recidivism), he was classified as an especially dangerous recidivist and ordered to serve his sentence in a special-regime colony.

The defendant admitted his guilt but appealed the decision, objecting to being classified as an especially dangerous recidivist.

On January 28 this year, the Criminal Chamber of the Andijan Regional Court reviewed the case at an open hearing held via video conference at the appellate level. The appellate court concluded that the trial court had incorrectly applied Article 164, Part 3, subparagraph “a” (repeated offense by a dangerous recidivist).

According to the panel of judges, the defendant had not previously been convicted under this article or for similar crimes, and therefore the element of repeat offending was absent.

Based on this, the appellate court decided to exclude subparagraph “a” of Article 164, Part 3, from the charges. However, the court found the type and length of the sentence to be fair and left the punishment of 10 years and two months of imprisonment unchanged.

The remaining parts of the court decision, including the procedure for serving the sentence, were also left unchanged. The appeal was partially upheld.