Damage or Destruction of a Thing: the Basic Composition
Article 187 of the Criminal Code regulates the damage or destruction of another's thing. The basic composition is completed where the act caused significant damage — it is this feature that separates the crime from an ordinary civil dispute. An act charged under the first part is punished by a fine, community service for a term of one hundred to one hundred and eighty hours, corrective labour for a term of up to one year, home arrest for a term of six months to two years, or imprisonment for a term of one to five years. Each punishment is a separate alternative, and their frameworks are defined in the norm itself.
The feature of significant damage is the central prop of the prosecution: it requires independent assessment, and the failure to establish it undermines the whole charge. For the defence it is precisely this gate that gives the case its realistic opportunity — if the damage is not significant, no crime exists under this article at all.
Arson, Explosion and Other Publicly Dangerous Means
Part two regulates the same act together with aggravating features: committed by arson, explosion or another publicly dangerous means; more than once; or by a group. Under this composition the law provides imprisonment for a term of three to six years, with restriction of arms-related rights or without it. The feature of arson means that the property was damaged or destroyed by means of fire, and this circumstance carries the qualification far away from the first part.
In practice, the main question of the defence arises precisely around this part: whether the fire was set intentionally or the result arose through negligence or violation of safety rules. Distinguishing intent from negligence decides the fate of the case, because an intentionally committed act moves to this composition, while an unwitting act is not covered by this norm.
Consequences That Aggravate Liability
Part three regulates the act provided for by part two which, through negligence, caused the death of a person or another grave consequence: in that case imprisonment for a term of six to ten years applies, with restriction of arms-related rights or without it. Part four concerns the same act where, through negligence, the death of two or more persons occurred — imprisonment for a term of nine to twelve years, again with restriction of arms-related rights or without it. In both compositions the consequence must have been caused through negligence — this link the prosecution must establish separately.
Intent or Negligence: the Central Question of the Defence
An accusation of damage by arson often arises exactly on the boundary where two versions stand on the same facts: a deliberately set fire or a fire caused by violation of safety rules. At this stage the defence builds on what evidence confirms intent — planning, motive, preparation or the manner of performing the act — and where this trace is absent, intent cannot be considered established.
The second direction is the assessment of the damage: how the damaged or destroyed property was valued, by whom and by which method. A groundless or inflated valuation of the damage is a frequent practical defect, and its critique sometimes closes even the framework of the first part. The third direction is the causation of the consequences in the third and fourth parts: the death or grave consequence must derive from the fire and not from other circumstances, and this chain lies on the prosecution.
Defence Strategy in Arson Cases
From the very first days of the case the qualification position must be defended: admitting the fact of damage does not mean admitting intent. The lawyer works on three fronts — the critique of the evidence (chronology, determination of the source of the fire, expert examinations), the verification of the valuation of the damage, and the control of the correctness of the qualification. Each failure on these three lines undermines one of the elements of the charge.
Experience shows that in cases of this category decisive importance belongs to independent expert conclusions and primary materials — a defender engaged in time achieves that the court takes into account the doubt towards the prosecution's version and that the application of the gravest part is set aside.
Frequently Asked Questions
What punishment applies by parts?
The first part contains several alternatives from a fine to imprisonment; an act committed by arson moves to the second part with imprisonment from three to six years; negligently caused death raises the terms up to nine to twelve years.
What is significant damage and who assesses it?
It is a circumstance to be established by the prosecution and requiring independent assessment; if the damage is not significant, no crime is formed under this article at all.
How is deliberate arson distinguished from mere carelessness?
By the trace of evidence of intent: planning, motive, preparation and the manner of performance; where this trace is absent, intent cannot be counted as established.
What does restriction of arms-related rights mean?
An additional punishment connected with the second, third and fourth parts, which the court may apply with the restriction or without it when using these parts.
How We Help on Legal.ge
Legal.ge brings together criminal-defence lawyers who will help you analyse an accusation of damage by arson, organize expert examinations and build the defence position. On the site you can compare specialists' experience and ratings, contact them directly and obtain a consultation on your case. Choose a specialist today on Legal.ge.