"Golden" fish

Literally, a golden fish became for one of the residents of the Braslaŭ district, caught by him illegally. The desire to benefit from nature's gifts turned into a multitude of problems for the fisherman. In particular, the man found himself in the dock.

Thus, in the summer of 2024, the accused took his wooden boat to the shore and sailed across the water body with the aim of retrieving previously set fishing nets. The man extracted five fishing nets with fish, which he placed in bags located in the boat. After that, the accused headed to the shore with his catch. However, during this time, the employees of the nature protection inspection observed the extraction of the accused's nets with fish (illegal catch of fish).

During the inspection of the boat, the nets and the caught fish (a total of 55 specimens) were seized. As a result of the illegal catch of fish by the accused, harm was caused to the environment, amounting to 208 basic units totaling 8,320 rubles.

At the court hearing, the accused did not admit his guilt in committing the crime.

In conjunction with the conclusions of the expert examinations, protocols of investigative actions, physical evidence, and other written materials of the case examined during the court investigation, the guilt of S. in the catch of fish using prohibited means (illegal catch of fish), which caused significant damage, was proven in full.

Considering the evidence presented by the state prosecutor, the court of the Braslaŭ district issued a guilty verdict, and based on part 2 of Article 281 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Belarus, the accused was sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 1 year and 6 months.

In accordance with part 1 of Article 78 of the Criminal Code, the imposed sentence of imprisonment shall not be enforced if, during the two-year probation period, the accused does not commit a new crime and fulfills the obligations imposed on him by the court.

Furthermore, the court ordered the accused to pay 5,632 rubles and 80 kopecks to the state as compensation for the harm caused to the environment.

The accused filed an appeal against the verdict of the Braslaŭ district court, claiming that the conclusions of the court stated in the verdict did not correspond to the actual circumstances of the criminal case. The appellate ruling of the Vitebsk Regional Court left the verdict of the Braslaŭ district court unchanged, and the appeal of the accused was dismissed.

Deputy Prosecutor
Braslaŭ District    
E.S. Isakova