It has been substantiated by the preliminary investigation of the criminal case sent by the RA Special Investigative Service for the objective, complete and thorough investigation that Suren Petrosyan has taken and exploited for a long time an “Opel Astra” car belonging to Karen Kh.
S. Petrosyan sold the car entrusted to him (worth 2.142.000 AMD) and spent the sum of 1milion 20 thousand AMD acquired in return of the car on personal needs.
Besides, under the pretext of settling the issue of the employment of Ani Sh.’s daughter as a nurse at a medical centre, Suren Petrosyan has claimed and received a significant amount of 1million 17thousand AMD but by failing to undertake any action, he appropriated the money in September 2014.
In addition, in June 2014, S. Petrosyan, taking the advantage of the fact that Aram N. trusted him, he promised to sell him an “Opel Vectra” car not belonging to him, and during the period from June to 20 September of the same year, under the same pretext, he had fraudulently received and appropriated a significant amount of money, which totalled to 1million 300 thousand AMD part by part as the price of the car.
The investigation also confirmed that learning that S. Petrosyan is a prosecutor’s driver, Stephan D. applied to him with request to help his friend Never H. to avoid the sentence of imprisonment based on the initiated criminal case. During the period from April to May, by abusing the trust towards himself, S. Petrosyan fraudulently received and appropriated 3 million 300 thousand AMD from Suren D. under the pretext of giving a positive solution to Nver H.’s case.
Furthermore, in August 2014. S. Petrosyan told Stephan D. that he needed $ 1000 in order to buy a new car for the prosecutor. He cheated Stephan D. by telling him that the money would be returned during the compensation for the damage caused to the property. And under the same pretext he received a significant amount of 400 thousand AMD from Stephan D.
Suren Petrosyan was charged under the requirements of Article 178, Part 1, 2 (2), and 3 (1) of the RA Criminal Code.
According to the court decision, detention has been chosen as a measure of restraint against him in pre-trial proceedings.
Notice: The person suspected in or accused of an alleged crime is presumed innocent unless proven guilty in the manner prescribed by the RA Criminal Procedure Code in accordance with the Court’s verdict made effective.
