The Basmanny District Court of Moscow arrested the former beneficiary of the Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank (Ruskobank) Khachatur Muradov (case no. 3/1-0301/2023. He is accused of especially large-scale fraud (part 4 of article 159 of the Criminal Code).
The investigation believes that with the approval of Muradov, Ruskobank issued unsecured loans to one-day companies and conducted lending secured by securities that had already been pledged in other financial institutions, Kommersant reports. Previously, the damage to Ruscobank exceeded 1 billion rubles.
The ICR opened a criminal case against Muradov on May 29. He was detained in Moscow on July 31. Muradov was charged with especially large-scale fraud, and the next day the investigation asked the district court to send the ex-beneficiary to a pre-trial detention center. The defense side insisted that the investigator’s arguments were not confirmed, and the imputed crime related to entrepreneurial activity. As a result, Muradov was arrested until September 30.
“Kommersant”, 08/04/2023, “One pledge is not a hindrance to another”: According to some reports, shortly before that, the ex-banker returned to the capital from Armenia, of which, like Russia, he is allegedly a citizen. […] According to Kommersant’s information, it refers to the theft of Ruskobank’s assets on the eve of revoking its license. On June 21, 2016, its once largest financial and credit institution in the Leningrad Region was lost in connection, as the regulator noted, with the bank’s “high-risk credit policy associated with the placement of funds in assets of unsatisfactory quality.” […]
The injured party in this case is the Deposit Insurance Agency (DIA), represented by the bankruptcy trustee. […] In turn, the defendant himself and his lawyer argued that the arguments of the investigation “are unfounded and not documented”, and the act imputed to the financier relates to entrepreneurial activity. […]
We also note that after the collapse of Ruskobank, the Central Bank and the DIA filed applications with law enforcement agencies to initiate criminal cases under a number of articles of the Criminal Code. In particular, they saw in the actions of top management and its owners, in addition to the same fraud, signs of embezzlement, causing property damage through fraud, deliberate bankruptcy, abuse of authority, falsification of evidence in a civil case, falsification of financial documents of accounting and reporting of a financial organization (Article 160 , 165, 196, 201, 303 and 172.1 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation). At the moment, only one filed case is known, in the framework of which Khachatur Muradov was arrested. — Inset K.ru
central bank withdrew Ruscobank had a license in June 2016, and a month later filed for bankruptcy of a financial institution.
DP.Ru, 06/20/2016, “A criminal case has been initiated against the former top manager of Ruskobank”: Ruskobank is one of the oldest in the Leningrad region. In the region, it ranks 18th in terms of assets (7.7 billion rubles as of June 1). From 2004 to 2009 was part of the holding “VEFK” Alexander Gitelson, later convicted of fraud. In 2007, through an additional issue of 25% + 1 share of the bank, the Leningrad region bought it. In 2009, VEFC Bank lost its license. At the same time, it turned out that 1.8 billion rubles placed on deposits by the government of the Leningrad Region were stuck on the accounts of Inkasbank, which was also part of the VEFK holding. As a result, 50% + 1 share of Ruscobank was arrested in favor of the region, which the region sold for 220 million rubles to Ursa Capital LLC (now SM Capital LLC) Khachatur Muradov. — Inset K.ru
“Kommersant”, 09/28/2017, “The banker was fined for a loan”: The Vsevolozhsk City Court of the Leningrad Region passed a guilty verdict on the first deputy director of Russian Commercial and Industrial Bank JSC. The court found it proven that banker Anton Yurkovets caused damage to the bank in the amount of 180 million rubles by his actions. For this, the court fined the banker 400 thousand rubles. […]
The banker, “in violation of the requirements of the bank’s charter and administrative documents on the procedure for concluding agreements in the field of lending, without the knowledge of the bank’s board,” concluded two additional agreements to lending agreements for a legal entity. According to these documents, a certain company, which received loans from the bank for almost 200 million rubles, was able not to repay the debt with real money, but to “repay” it with worthless promissory notes of a long-ruined company.
As a result of the actions of the accused, the bank suffered damage in the amount of at least 180 million rubles, which led to the onset of serious consequences in the form of a significant difficulty in the bank’s economic activities,” the Investigative Committee said. During the investigation, it was not possible to establish the degree of personal interest of the bank’s top manager in carrying out financial fraud. — Inset K.ru