According to information posted in the State Register of Judicial Acts, the senior investigator of the GKNB's Main Investigative Department has submitted a petition to the court for the application of a preventive measure in the form of arrest against Ikram [name changed I.K.]. It is indicated that a criminal case against him has been initiated on the grounds of a crime provided for in paragraph 3 of part 3 of Article 222 of the Criminal Code of the Kyrgyz Republic, concerning the legalization (laundering) of criminal proceeds.
According to the investigative materials, Ikram, being the organizer of a criminal group, acted in concert with other individuals, including his father I.B.A. and an officer of the special police unit under the Ministry of Internal Affairs K.M.K. This criminal alliance engaged in illegal usury from January 2024 to May 2025, exploiting the financial vulnerability of citizens and issuing loans at high interest rates (from 5 to 10% per month, 60-120% per year) without the necessary permits.
The investigation established that to ensure the repayment of loans, Ikram and K.M.K. used threats and psychological pressure, forcing debtors to transfer pledged property (including residential houses) to affiliated individuals or to arrange fictitious sales, which facilitated the legalization of their income through resale and registration in the names of third parties.
In particular, in May 2025, Ikram, with the support of K.M.K., threatened G.K.M. to transfer a house in the village of Aleksandrovka as collateral, as confirmed by the testimonies of the victim and other witnesses.
The investigation found that K.M.K., acting on Ikram's instructions, participated in a fictitious video recording of the "voluntary" transfer of the house, exerting pressure on the debtor and controlling the re-registration of the property, which contributed to concealing the illegal origin of the funds.
Ikram's actions were aimed at creating and leading a stable group engaged in illegal usury and the legalization (laundering) of significant amounts of money obtained through criminal means, by concealing their sources and introducing them into legal circulation through registration in the names of affiliated individuals and subsequent sale.
Thus, Ikram committed a crime provided for in part 2 of Article 41 and paragraph 3 of part 3 of Article 222 of the Criminal Code, where the qualifying feature is the legalization (laundering) of funds and other property obtained through criminal means, in especially large amounts, as the organizer of a criminal group. As a result, Ikram was detained and placed in the GKNB's pre-trial detention center.
Later, he was charged with committing a crime provided for in part 2 of Article 41 and paragraph 3 of part 2 of Article 222 of the Criminal Code.
Considering that Ikram is accused of a serious crime for which a long prison sentence is provided, and there is a risk of his fleeing from the investigative authorities, the investigator petitioned for Ikram to be taken into custody for two months.
The Lenin District Court of Bishkek granted the petition and placed him in custody during the investigation.
Dissatisfied with the court's decision, Ikram's lawyer filed an appeal, arguing that there is no evidence in the case materials of his involvement in the alleged acts. According to him, Ikram merely redeemed G.K.M.'s debt to a construction company, issued a loan, and registered the property with the consent of the borrower's spouse, which is confirmed by receipts and indicates lawful civil relations.
The lawyer noted that the legalization of criminal proceeds involves two stages: obtaining income through criminal means and subsequently giving it a legal appearance, and neither of these stages has been proven in this case. Ikram denies his guilt, asserting that the funds were obtained as a result of lawful entrepreneurial activity.
In the defense's opinion, the investigating judge did not consider the validity of the charges and did not specify the concrete facts on which the application of arrest is based. The lawyer requested to overturn the decision of the Lenin District Court and to choose a milder preventive measure, such as house arrest.
The judicial panel of the Bishkek City Court upheld the district court's decision, having reviewed the case materials in August 2025.
