Through comprehensive investigation conducted within the framework of the criminal proceeding initiated in Ararat Regional Investigative Department of the RA Investigative Committee on corruption-related abuses committed in Aygepat community hall it was fund out and grounded that S.P., holding the position of the head of Aygepat settlement of Artashat community, temporarily exercising organizational-managerial and administrative-economic powers in the local self-government body, with a notarized real estate lease agreement signed on the base of the Council of Elders’ decision, dated May 5, 2012,, rented out 5 rooms of the building located at Ankakhutyan 4, Aygepat village to a citizen for 10.000 AMD per month for 15 years term assuring the lessee that at any case, even if the property has been sold the agreement signed for 15 years would not be terminated.

Then, with the help of two employees of the community hall, he entered false information in the records of July 14, 2012 of the Council of Elders’ session on the allegation that two more members of the Council of Elders also expressed their support for the alienation of the dilapidated building, which was in a poor state and belonged to the community in this way artificially creating grounds to ensure the jurisdiction of the given session of the Council of Elders. Whereas, the latters did not take part in the mentioned session of the Council of Elders and did not sign the record.  

In that document false data were entered on the mentioned building being dilapidated and in a poor state and on this base the mentioned building was put up for auction without observing the legal requirement of its mandatory evaluation in cases of alienation of communally owned immovable property.

Then S.P. set a starting price for the alienation of the mentioned building with a market value of 7,210,000 AMD as of August 24, 2012, the price recorded as of 2007, a significantly lower price than its real value - 2.570.000 AMD ignoring the capital renovations carried out in the building between 2007 and 2012. Violating the legislation requirements, without a publication of the auction announcement in the prescribed manner, on August 24, 2012 he organized a formal sale and purchase of the mentioned property, in which his wife’s father participated and was found the winner, the other participant was, in violation of the requirements of the law, one of the employees of the community hall of Aygepat.

In the result of the formal auction the mentioned building was formally alienated to the father-in-law of the community head for 2.620.000 AMD, whereas the market price of the building at that period was 7.210.000 AMD. In this way pecuniary damage in large amount - 4.590.000 AMD was caused to Aygepat community. Moreover, the community head continued receiving the monthly rent for the rooms given for rent.  

Reaching prior agreement with his wife and wife’s father on help to avoid the responsibility for the crime committed by him, by signing an agreement on the basis of the payment receipt provided by them, the tax receipt, the sales contract, the state registration certificate of the right to immovable property, signing a formal sales contract on the base of the unified reference issued by the united division of the staff of the State Committee of the Real Estate Cadaster under the Government of the Republic of Armenia, creating the illusion of acquiring property legally, by S.P.’s organization, the mentioned property was sold by his father-in-law to his wife based on a formal agreement for 3.000.000 AMD, was registered in his name, and ownership certificate was given. As a result, illusion was created that the mentioned property was purchased by S.P.’s wife and in September, 2012 the swindled property was legalized.

On the base of the obtained sufficient facts charge was pressed against the head of Ayhepat community according to the Point 3 of the Part 2 of the Article 256 of RA current Criminal Code, the Article 196, the Point 3 of the Part 3 of the Article 190 of RA previous Criminal Code and the Part 1 of the Article 445 of RA current Criminal Code. Mortgage and suspension of office were used as a pretrial measure against him. Charge was pressed against the latter’s father–in-law according to the Point 3 of the Part 3 of the Article 46-256 of RA Criminal Code, the Article 38-196 and the Points 1 and 2 of the Part 2 of the Article 190 of RA previous Criminal Code. Charge was pressed against his wife according to the Points 1 and 2 of the Part 2 of the Article 190 of RA previous Criminal Code. Absence ban was used as a pretrial measure against them.

Public criminal prosecutions initiated against the two employees of the community hall were terminated by the prosecutor’s decision based on the Point 12 of the Part 1 of the Article 12 of RA Criminal Procedure Code.

Preliminary investigation was completed, the materials of the criminal proceeding with the bill of indictment were sent to the prosecutor for approval and referral to court.