Court in Kazan refuses to arrest son of chairman of local court in case of swindling
No other measure of restraint was imposed on Elmaz Musin.
The Sovetsky District Court of Kazan rejected the petition of the investigation to arrest Elmaz Musin, the son of Fanis Musin, who is the Chairman of the Vakhitovsky District Court of Kazan. The latter is suspected of swindling on a large scale, reports Interfax.
According to the agency, the investigation asked the court to place Musin in a pre-trial detention center until March 31, but the court rejected this petition, without choosing another preventive measure. Thus, Musin Jr. remains at large.
“Musin can hide from the investigative and judicial authorities. His father heads the Vakhitovsky District Court of Kazan. Thus, through him, the suspect can influence the course of the case,” said investigator Ilnur Akhmetgalimov quoted by Idel.Realii. “His wealth will suffice to leave the country, being at large.”
Musin's defense, in turn, stated that the client did not receive any official subpoena. However, the lawyers did not deny the fact of the investigator's calls on the suspect’s mobile. Musin himself commented the situation: “The call could be from anyone, I did not pay attention. I'm not going to hide, I have a pregnant wife. If I wanted to, I would have disappeared long ago.”
According to the investigation, in 2011-2014, several employees of the company Sredne-Volzhsky Transnefteproduct transferred more than 2.6 million rubles (~46.000 USD) to Musin's account as a salary. At that, the judge's son held a fictitious position in the company, the investigators emphasize.
The case was initiated under part 4 of Art. 159 of the Russian Criminal Code (swindling committed by an organized group or on an especially large scale).
Moscow Chief Investigator accuses FSB of using Shakro’s case as screen for checking Investigative Committee
The head of the Moscow department of the Investigative Committee said that by initiating the case against Zakhary Kalashov the FSB “actually covers” the absence of grounds for criminal cases against Mikhail Maksimenko and other high-ranking officers of the department.