Communicated on 12 June 2014

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 60890/08 Bayzhan Kholmuradovich ISMOGULOV against Russia lodged on 14 November 2008

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Bayzhan Kholmuradovich Ismogulov , is a Russian national, who was born in 1971 and lives in St Petersburg .

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

On 2 September 2002 at about 9.30 p.m. the applicant had a conflict with I., the director of the dormitory where he lived. I. demanded the applicant to vacate the premises and tried to enter the applicant ’ s flat. After the applicant refused to let him in, I. called the police.

When the police officer P. arrived, the applicant opened the door. Through the opened door I. administered several blows to the applicant ’ s body with his fist holding a set of keys, and the applicant tried to shut the door. At that moment P. applied tear gas on the applicant and threatened him with a gun.

It appears that the applicant called an ambulance and that ambulance doctor recorded injuries on the applicant ’ s body and eyes. This medical certificate was not made available to the Court.

On 23 May 2003 the applicant complained about the incident to the prosecutor ’ s office.

On three occasions, ‒ on 1 July 2003, 11 May 2005 and 30 May 2006 the Deputy Prosecutor of Kalininskiy District of St Petersburg refused to institute criminal proceedings against I. and P.

Following the applicant ’ s complaints, on 25 August 2004, 12 September 2005 and 15 January 2007 respectively, Kalininskiy District Court found the above decisions unsubstantiated and ordered the prosecutor ’ s off ice to conduct a proper inquiry with questioning of all persons involved in the incident.

In the absence of any progress in the conduct of the inquiry by December 2007, the applicant challenged the inactivity of the prosecutor ’ s office before Kalininskiy District Court.

On 15 May 2008 Kalininskiy District Court found unlawful the inactivity of the prosecutor ’ s office in conducting a proper inquiry in the applicant ’ s case and obliged Kalininskiy District Prosecutor to remedy the situation.

It appears that to the present day there is no final decision on the matter.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains about the failure of the domestic authorities to carry out a prompt and effective investigation into his allegations. He refers to Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention .

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Having regard to the procedural protection from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, § 131; ECHR 2000-IV), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?