The shooter against 'Pouria Alipour' and the officer who rode his motorcycle over his body were each sentenced to 3 years in prison.

Payam Derafshan, the defense lawyer of Pourya Alipur (one of the victims of the events of 2022, known as the Naziyabad case), announced the issuance of a ruling regarding his client in the case of the Fourth Branch of the Military Court in Tehran, stating:According to the ruling issued, which has been communicated to the lawyers, two of the defendants have been sentenced to imprisonment while the other defendants have been acquitted of the charges against them.In this ruling, Corporal A.S. – the third defendant and the individual who fired a weapon – has been sentenced to three years of punitive imprisonment without applying mitigating circumstances, due to the severity of the duty violations and their harmful outcomes, for committing offenses such as shooting in violation of regulations, attempted intentional murder, and injuring a person while on duty, all of which fall under the criteria of spiritual multiplicity and are subject to Article 131 of the Islamic Penal Code approved in 2013.

He was also sentenced to one year in prison for creating a climate of mistrust towards the armed forces and, regarding public disorder and the fear of recurrence, based on Article 614 of the Islamic Penal Code (punitive section), to two years of sixth-degree punitive imprisonment, of which, according to the law, only the harsher penalty (three years in prison) will be applicable to him.

Regarding the fourth accused, Sergeant R.A., the court sentenced him to three years of incarceration for intentionally causing harm to the injured person — due to the motorcycle passing over the complainant's body — and, due to creating a climate of distrust towards the armed forces, to one year of incarceration, with only the harsher punishment being applied in his case. His charges fall under subsection a of Article 500 and Article 53 of the Armed Forces Crimes Punishment Law.

These defendants denied their presence at the scene of the disaster and the commission of criminal acts, but the court has convicted them based on inspection and protection reports from Faraja. Additionally, considering that the relevant commanders denied being present at the scene at the time of the disaster and the court stated in its ruling that no substantial evidence proving their presence at the scene was presented to the court, the court has ruled to acquit the commanders.