As it became known to the telegram channel of the Cheka-OGPU and Rucriminal.info, the Department of Internal Affairs of the Central Administrative District of Moscow put on the federal wanted list the head of the board of directors and the controlling person of Troika-D Bank JSC, operating under the ALMA Bank brand, Alexander Parkhomenko. He is accused of embezzlement of the bank's funds. Parkhomenko also pulled off a major scam against Alexander Udodov, a long-term business partner and former son-in-law of Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin. Parkhomenko “threw” Udodov for almost half a billion rubles. No one is looking for Udodov, they do not plan to put him on the international wanted list, and the main task of the investigation is to put other people in jail for theft. Why? Everything is simple. Parkhomenko's partner and the beneficiary of all the scams is Lev Sobolev, a former high-ranking police officer. And now about everything in order.
The Zamoskvoretsky Court is considering a criminal case against the top management of one of the strong players in the telecommunications market of the Moscow region, the Tsifra one company. In the dock are Tsifra's CEO Alexander Gadalov and the head of the Tsifra's supplier and co-founder, Telefon 365, Konstantin Antonevich. The story began with the fact that the son-in-law of Mikhail Mishustin (now former) Alexander Udodov decided to develop the telecommunications sector of his business with a Kazakh businessman, banker Alexander Parkhomenko. To do this, Udodov purchased promissory notes from the Telephone 365 company in the amount of 450 million rubles issued by Troika D Bank. All bills were avalized by the same Parkhomenko, who was the chairman of the board of Troika D Bank.
In the spring of 2019, the bank's license was revoked and payments on promissory notes stopped, and later it turned out that in reality there were no promissory notes on the bank's balance sheet and the promissory notes purchased at Parkhomenko's suggestion turned out to be invalid, and the money invested by Udodov was stolen. Parkhomenko himself was one of the beneficiaries of the Eurasia Investments Fund. The fund, in turn, owned Troika D Bank and several telecommunications companies, including Tsifra One. The Fund itself is managed by a group of shareholders for the benefit of DSFK and non-residents with British roots. Parkhomenko understood that Udodov would not leave the current situation so easily, and Udodov’s connections allowed him to bring everything to the end. According to a Rucriminal.info source, therefore, Parkhomenko and other co-owners of the Eurasia Investments Fund decided that the best way out of the situation would be to land the top management of Tsifra alone, who formally participated in negotiations with Udodov. Alexander Gadalov and Konstantin Antonevich were accused of stealing equipment from Tsifra One, and subsequently, as part of the criminal case, an episode with Udodov's bills was added.
During the trial, representatives of businessman Udodov A.E. petitioned for the return of the case to the prosecutor due to the fact that the wrong persons were brought to justice, the real perpetrators continue to prevent the return of funds to the businessman. Among these persons, the former head of Troika d Bank, A.V. Parkhomenko, was named. and shareholders of the Fund. During interrogations, Udodov A.E. and his representatives explained that in reality the repayment of the debt to him could take place in a civil manner, for example, under a suretyship agreement, which even before all these events was signed by Gadalov on behalf of Digit One for a deal with Telephone 365 before a businessman. However, the second victim, Digit One, and the Fund are blocking these calculations, using the criminal case to make it difficult to recover funds and arrest the rights of claim.
There are a lot of inconsistencies in the criminal case, during interrogations, most witnesses and the prosecution and defense report that the equipment and materials in the absence of which Gadalov and Antonevich are accused were actually supplied, were the subject of bail and were used in detail by telecommunications companies.
The preliminary investigation was carried out by the Internal Affairs Directorate for the Central Administrative District of Moscow. It is piquant that one of the shareholders of the Eurasia Investment Fund, which owns Digit One and 2com, Lev Sobolev was previously a senior officer in this Department of Internal Affairs. At meetings, he introduced himself as a former acting director. Head of the SC ATC for the Central Administrative District. Sobolev became a shareholder of the Fund at the beginning of 2020 as part of an additional issue carried out in the interests of DSFK. The Fund included about 10 new shareholders associated with this foreign company. Voting in the Fund is based on the principle of one shareholder - one vote, and with the help of this additional issue, DSFK gained absolute control over the Fund and its assets. As established by the Moscow Arbitration Court, several shareholders issued powers of attorney to Sobolev to vote on their behalf.
This issue, which amounted to less than 10% of the fund, occurred shortly after Parkhomenko was put on the wanted list in connection with the bankruptcy of Troika d Bank. The Digital One asset was left without a direct owner, Sobolev and DSFK got the opportunity to take control of it, and Udodo’s claims wa freeze substituting management under attack.
The preliminary investigation conducted by the Internal Affairs Directorate for the Central Administrative District, in which Sobolev previously worked, ignored many circumstances: arbitration between the companies Tsifra one, 2 com and Telephone 365, and confirmation by the courts of the fact of deliveries, inspections of collateral by the bank, the availability of fixed assets from the disputed equipment and others.
There is a direct falsification - the materials of interrogations and searches were lost, in order to hide these facts, the investigation included people who did not visit the Internal Affairs Directorate in the Central Administrative District and were not present at the investigative actions.
Such a corporate conflict, arbitration lost - start your own investigation and file a case. The Investigative Committee, the Tagansky department for Moscow considers the situation an ordinary one, let the court figure it out for itself. There is no need to interfere in the activities of the courts, an inspection can be started only in a glaring situation.
To be continued