Polyclinic Director Accused of Embezzling 3.4 Million Dram and Office Forgery; Case Sent to Court

The investigation by the Lori Regional Investigative Department of the RA Investigative Committee into a case of embezzlement and office forgery of particularly large amounts has been completed. This was reported by the Department of Information and Public Relations of the RA Investigative Committee.

As a result of investigative actions conducted within the criminal case, it was revealed that the director of "Vanadzor Number 1 Polyclinic" LLC, who held the position from January 2001 to October 2019, exercised administrative and managerial powers and, being a public official, committed large-scale embezzlement and office forgery during his tenure. Upon learning that his sister-in-law was facing financial difficulties, in March 2011, he signed an employment contract with her and hired her as a cleaner in the same company.

However, he was fully aware that she had not been attending work and had not performed her job duties for several years, from March 2011 to October 2017. For the sake of personal gain, using his official position, he falsified official documents certifying the hours worked, creating, approving, and validating documents indicating the worker's attendance and actual hours worked, although she never showed up for work. In doing so, he embezzled 3,459,200 AMD from the company's funds.

Meanwhile, the director's relative signed the attendance logs at the end of each month and received the salary based on the falsified hours worked, using it for personal needs. This facilitated the director's office forgery and resulted in the embezzlement of 3,459,200 AMD in particularly large amounts.

Based on sufficient evidence, the director of "Vanadzor Number 1 Polyclinic" has been charged under Article 179 (embezzlement or misappropriation) part 3, point 1, and Article 314 (office forgery) part 1 of the RA Criminal Code. His relative has been charged under Article 38-179 (facilitating embezzlement or misappropriation) part 3, point 1, and Article 38-314 (facilitating office forgery) part 1 of the Criminal Code. As a preventive measure, a signature not to leave has been chosen for them.

The investigation has been completed, and the criminal case has been sent to court with an indictment.

Notice: The suspect or accused is considered innocent until proven guilty by a valid court ruling, as defined by the Criminal Procedure Code of the RA.