Marat Barkulov was 19. He died after being shot by an officer during military training in Mangystau. Whether the shooting was accidental was disputed at trial; the court found it was intentional murder. Marat’s father believed that neither the legal classification nor the sentence fully reflected the gravity of what happened.
From the death at Oymasha to cassation
7 September 2024. A platoon commander shot a conscript at the Oymasha range. The soldier died on the way to hospital. The following day, Tengrinews, citing the Chief Military Prosecutor’s Office, reported a murder investigation.
24 January 2025. A court sentenced Lieutenant Damir Dosov to 13 years in prison, stripped him of his rank and ordered payment of 20 million tenge in material and moral damages. Kazakhstanskaya Pravda reported the military court’s statement. An award of damages does not establish that the money was paid.
27 January 2026. According to Lada.kz, citing lawyer Azamat Sagal, the cassation court left the verdict unchanged. The report also said it had previously been upheld on appeal.
Why the father disputed the sentence
Dosov maintained that the shot was accidental. The court found him guilty of intentional murder under Article 99, Part 1, of the Criminal Code. The defendant’s account was not the court’s finding.
After the verdict, Marat’s father, Erbol Kuntinov, told Lada.kz that he wanted the offence classified under Part 2 of the same article, with a sentence of at least 19 years. He argued that the killing had a hooligan motive. That was his position, not the classification adopted by the court.
The family’s objection therefore concerned more than the number of years: the father believed the crime itself should have been assessed differently.
What happened to the chain of command
Before the verdict, on 21 January 2025, Ground Forces Commander Mereke Kushekbayev described an internal investigation. According to Tengrinews’s report from the briefing, the commander of Regional Command West received a disciplinary sanction, and its air defence chief was removed from his post.
Three officials were warned of incomplete service compliance, and four other officers received disciplinary sanctions. These measures show that the inquiry extended to the chain of command. The announcement does not establish which subsequent changes to weapons handling and supervision were checked in practice.
What the verdict settled, and what still needs an answer
There is a court outcome supported by the reports: an officer was convicted of murder, and the higher courts upheld the verdict. The father’s objection remains part of Marat’s story.
The reports do not establish whether the damages were paid or the results of measures taken after the internal investigation. What shortcomings were identified? What changed in officer training and weapons supervision? Who checked implementation, and when? The cited sources do not answer these questions.
In the case of Alibek Kalbay, the family also sought answers from commanders. Families facing a death during service now can use our guide to initial enquiries and documents to prepare specific questions.
Documents not yet available
The cassation outcome is based on Lada.kz’s report of 27 January 2026, citing the victim’s lawyer. QAZ.ARMY does not hold the full cassation ruling or documents confirming payment of the damages awarded.