In Kotlas announced the verdict in the case of extortion ten years ago
One of the defendants, a 34-year-old resident of the Republic of Dagestan Abubakar Akhmedov, fled justice for more than eight years

One of the defendants, a 34-year-old resident of the Republic of Dagestan Abubakar Akhmedov, was a fugitive from justice for more than eight years.
The Kotlass City Court on October 16, 2026 found him guilty of extortion committed by a group of persons on preliminary conspiracy, with the use of violence, on a large scale (paragraphs "a", "c", "g" part 2 of Art. 163 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
As the investigation established, in December 2016, a resident of Kotlas, having learned about the debt of his acquaintance to a third party of 120 thousand rubles, decided to illegally take possession of the victim’s money in a much larger amount. When the debtor was deceived about the assignment of debt, he attracted accomplices, among whom was Akhmedov. Attackers claimed support for “criminal authorities” and put tough psychological pressure on the man. On December 7, 2016, during a personal meeting, the victim was handed a note with an artificially inflated debt calculation. To suppress the will to resist, Akhmedov used physical force, and his accomplices threatened to kill the family of the victim, violence against his wife and children, as well as the destruction of property. Later, the amount of claims “reduced” to 500 thousand rubles, offering to issue loans. Fearing for loved ones, the victim appealed to law enforcement agencies.
Three members of the criminal group were sentenced to real terms of imprisonment a few years ago. Akhmedov was a fugitive from justice for more than eight years and was on the federal wanted list. The court hearings with his participation were held via video conference.
The defendant pleaded guilty partly, trying to convince the court that he only helped pay back the debt without personal gain. However, the court criticized these arguments and found them untenable.
When imposing punishment, the court took into account mitigating circumstances: apologies, voluntary compensation for moral damage, repentance, sports achievements (master of sports), active participation in the life of the village, care for disabled relatives and the performance of guardian duties.



