Pirogov Vitaliy Vitalevich

In Rubtsovsk, Altai Krai, no later than June 2024, a criminal case was initiated against 24-year-old Vitaly Pirogov, a native of Zmeinogorsk, on charges of calls for terrorism, committing a terrorist act, inducement to commit a terrorist act, and training for terrorist activities. The case of calls for terrorism was separated into a separate proceeding. According to the investigation, in the "open community of the Telegram messenger" he posted comments "containing a public call for violent actions, with the aim of inciting an unlimited circle of messenger users to carry out terrorist activities. It is unknown exactly what Pirogov wrote. IN THE SECOND CASE, Piragov was charged with the fact that, being opposed to the policies pursued by the authorities, he studied materials about arson of military enlistment offices, and offered his acquaintance to jointly set fire to the military commissariat, but the latter refused. After that, Pirogov independently manufactured three incendiary devices, with which he arrived at the building of the military commissariat of the city of Rubtsovsk, Rubtsovsky and Yegoryevsky districts of the Altai Territory, set them on fire and threw them into the building, after which he fled. The man was placed in a pre-trial detention center. On June 6, 2024, the 2nd Eastern District Military Court found Vitaly Pirogov guilty in a case of calls for terrorism and sentenced him to imprisonment in a general regime colony for 4 years. The court also deprived him of the right to engage in the administration of websites, forums, groups and chats on the Internet and messengers for 3 years. The verdict was not appealed and entered into legal force. On August 1, 2025, the 2nd Eastern Military District Court found Vitaly Pirogov guilty in the case of arson of a military enlistment office and, by the totality of crimes by partial combination with the first conviction, sentenced him to imprisonment in a strict regime colony for 18 years, with the first 4 years to be served in prison, with restriction of freedom for 1.5 years, with deprivation of the right to engage in activities related to the public placement of appeals and other materials on the Internet, for 5 years. The verdict was also not appealed and entered into legal force.