Motion to the Investigator for Termination of the Criminal Case on the Fact of Fraud – Misappropriation of Another Person’s Property by Deception

To: Senior Investigatorof the Police Department under the Medeu District

 Police Departmentof the Police Department of AlmatyPolice Major D.K. Kabitova

From: Counsel for the suspectBoy Mi Tursungalievna– Attorney Sabit Davletovich Nigmetov

IIN: ....

Almaty, 79 Abylai Khan Avenue, Office 304Tel.: 87009785755

MOTION FOR TERMINATION OF THE CRIMINAL CASE

Criminal case ERDR No. 267570031000133 concerning my client, Boy Mei T., is currently pending before the Police Department under the Medeu District Police Department of the Police Department of Almaty.

The actions of Boy M.T. have been qualified under subparagraphs 1) and 4) of part 3 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, i.e. as fraud – misappropriation of another person’s property by deception and abuse of trust, on a large scale, repeatedly.

At present, Boy M.T. and the victims, K A.G., Aa S.T., and Ka A.T., have reconciled through mediation within the framework of the criminal proceedings.

According to the agreements on reconciliation of the parties through mediation concluded in the course of the criminal proceedings, the victims K A.G., Aa S.T., and Ka A.T.:

The victim K A.G. agreed to accept KZT 2,040,000 as compensation for the damage and has no claims against Boy M.T.

The victim Aa S.T. agreed to accept KZT 3,700,000 as compensation for the damage and has no claims against Boy M.T.

The victim Ka A.T. agreed to accept KZT 7,000,000 as compensation for the damage and has no claims against Boy M.T.

Thus, the criminal case was initiated prematurely and is subject to termination on the following grounds.

According to paragraph 1 of the Regulatory Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Kazakhstan “On Judicial Practice in Cases of Fraud”, an essential element of fraud is the presence of a selfish motive on the part of the perpetrator, i.e. the intention to unlawfully and gratuitously convert another person’s property into his or her own property.

However, Boy M.T.’s consistent statements demonstrate that she borrowed money from the victims subject to payment of remuneration (interest), namely:

– from the victim Ka A.G., KZT 3,000,000, subject to payment of remuneration at the rate of 10% per month. She repaid KZT 1,000,000 to him before the criminal case was initiated;

– from the victim Koy A.T., KZT 12,000,000, subject to payment of remuneration in the amount of KZT 1,200,000. She repaid approximately KZT 7,000,000 to her before the criminal case was initiated;

– from the victim Aoy S.T., KZT 2,600,000, subject to payment of remuneration at the rate of 15% per month. She repaid KZT 2,300,000 to her before the criminal case was initiated.

The statements of Boy M.T. are consistent with the materials of the criminal case, namely the screenshots of correspondence with the victims, the account statements of Boy M.T. from Kaspi Bank JSC, and the Kaspi Gold receipts submitted to the pre-trial investigation body.

According to the agreements on reconciliation of the parties through mediation concluded in the course of the criminal proceedings, the victims K A.G., Aa S.T., and Ka A.T. confirmed that they agreed with the arguments presented by Boy M.T.

At the same time, it should be taken into account that, despite the fact that the money was allegedly misappropriated by Boy M.T. from the victims in 2023–2024, the latter applied to the police only in 2026. This also indirectly corroborates Boy M.T.’s statements that she had been paying remuneration to the victims and that, for this reason, they did not apply to the police or to the court.

Under criminal law, fraud may only be committed with direct intent to appropriate another person’s property through deception or abuse of trust. An essential condition for fraud is that, at the time of entering into the transaction, the person had the intent (intention) to gratuitously appropriate the property.

The case does not establish the existence of deception on the part of Boy M.T. or an intention to unlawfully and gratuitously obtain possession of another person’s property. Therefore, she may not be held criminally liable under Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

If Boy M.T. were held criminally liable under Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, this would violate the requirement of paragraph 3 of Article 77 of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, according to which any doubts concerning the guilt of a person shall be interpreted in favor of the accused.

Thus, the circumstances indicate the existence of civil-law relations between Boy M.T. and the victims Kym A.G., Aoy S.T., and Koy A.T., consisting of the conclusion of loan agreements and Boy M.T.’s failure to perform her obligation to repay the loan amounts.

Pursuant to subparagraph 2) of part 1 of Article 35 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the criminal case shall be terminated due to the absence in the actions of Boy M.T. of the elements of the criminal offense provided for by subparagraphs 1) and 4) of part 3 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to Articles 70 and 99 of the Criminal Procedure Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan, I REQUEST:

– To terminate criminal case ERDR No. 267570031000133 due to the absence in the actions of Boy M.T. of the elements of the criminal offense provided for by subparagraphs 1) and 4) of part 3 of Article 190 of the Criminal Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

Defense Counsel – Attorney ____________________ S. Nigmetov

09 April 2026

Attention!   

       Law and Law Law Law draws your attention to the fact that this document is basic and does not always meet the requirements of a particular situation. Our lawyers are ready to assist you in legal advice, drawing up any legal document suitable for your situation.  

 For more information,  please contact a Lawyer / Attorney by phone: +7 (708) 971-78-58; +7 (700) 978 5755, +7 (700) 978 5085. 

Attorney at Law Almaty Lawyer Legal Services Legal Advice Civil Criminal Administrative Cases Disputes Protection Arbitration Law Firm Kazakhstan Law Office  Court Cases