0 8000 12 11

On November 16, 2015, the General Jurisdiction Court of Lori Marz (Region) resumed examination of the appeal by HCA Vanadzor against the decree by S. Poghosyan, Senior Investigator at Vanadzor Bazum Division, RA Police Lori Marz (Region) Department on rejecting initiation of criminal proceedings. The court hearing was attended by lawyer Ani Chatinyan, representative of appellant HCA Vanadzor, representative of the investigating agency and supervising prosecutor Poghosyan. By presenting the circumstances of the case, the appellant party particularly noted that the RA Police Lori Marz (Region) Department Vanadzor Bazum Division had failed to admit the crime report filed by the Organization and record it as such in the register of crime reports and instead, recorded the complaint submitted by the Organization. The representative of HCA Vanadzor also outlined the shortcomings and omission of the actions that the investigating agency was obliged to have taken upon receiving the crime report, but had failed to do so, and which led to the violation of the rights and legal interests of the person who sought legal advice with the Organization. A. Chatinyan also noted that the Organization considered the failure of the investigating agency to carry out proper investigation as a differentiated approach based on the illness and social status of the person in question. The Court asked several questions to clarify some aspects of the appellants’ allegations, particularly those insisting that S. Gh. was a victim of fraud, as well as that the device was not found and no full and comprehensive investigation was carried out. A. Chatinyan stated that S. Gh.’s appearance wass also indicative of some mental health problems and added that he suffered some other health problems as well. She said that some efforts had been taken to bring S. Gh. to the court hearing, but they failed. Then the Court gave the floor to Investigator Poghosyan representing the investigating agency, who stated that the relevant actions taken had not revealed any information on theft of any personal computer in the period in question. He also submitted to the Court the note sent by ArmenTel CJSC which was received on May 20, 2015. In response to A. Chatinyan’s question on whether it was impossible to find the device, investigator Poghosyan provided a negative answer and then added that the measures to find and question S. Gh. yielded no results as well. In his speech, Prosecutor Poghosyan found that the appeal was unfounded by referring to the forensic handwriting expert examination opinion which confirmed that the handwriting was that of S. Gh. He also noted that the crime report was entered in the register 2, since it only contained suspicions rather than any grounds regarding any elements of crime. The opinion of the official investigation carried out against investigator H. Sakanyan was also submitted to the Court, as reported earlier. The Court left to the retiring room to make a ruling. By its ruling announced shortly after, the Court dismissed the appeal of HCA Vanadzor.