Currency rates from 14/01/2026
$1 – 12048.04
UZS – -0.42%
€1 – 14062.47
UZS – -0.51%
₽1 – 153.28
UZS – -0.35%
Search
Man Fined in Tashkent for False Report of Trump’s Kidnapping

Man Fined in Tashkent for False Report of Trump’s Kidnapping

Man Fined in Tashkent for False Report of Trump’s Kidnapping

Tashkent, Uzbekistan (UzDaily.com) — The Bektemir District Criminal Court of Tashkent reviewed a case involving a man who, while intoxicated, called the city’s Main Department of Internal Affairs with an unusual report concerning U.S. President Donald Trump.

A 37-year-old resident of the Shakhrikhan District of Andijan Region was fined three base calculation units (1.236 million soums) for making a false call to the emergency number “102”, claiming that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro had been kidnapped by U.S. President Donald Trump.

A recording of the call, which recently appeared on social media, shows the man requesting authorities to “take action” against Donald Trump, whom he claimed was “living in the White House.”

The case was considered by the Bektemir District Criminal Court on January 7, with the call having been made the day before. Law enforcement officials, who drew up the administrative offense report, initially classified the man’s actions under three articles of the Administrative Liability Code: Article 183 — petty hooliganism, Part 1 of Article 194 — failure to comply with lawful orders of law enforcement officers (he refused to appear at the police station), and Article 199 — knowingly false call to specialized services.

During the court session, the man, who had previous administrative offenses, admitted his guilt, explaining that he had been intoxicated and did not recall the content of his call. He expressed remorse, stated that he had not understood the potential consequences of his actions, and requested a more lenient penalty.

Presiding Judge F. Pulatov concluded that the man’s actions did not constitute petty hooliganism or failure to obey lawful orders; therefore, the charges under the first two articles were dismissed. Guilt under Article 199, which provides liability for knowingly false calls to specialized services, was confirmed.

When imposing the fine, the court considered the offender’s personal characteristics, the public danger posed by his actions, and the educational purpose of the penalty — promoting respect for the law and preventing future offenses.

Stay up to date with the latest news
Subscribe to our telegram channel