A wave of new legal actions surrounding Ayaz Shabutdinov, a well-known blogger and business coach, has been reported by several Telegram channels. The information points to seven fresh episodes that the Moscow Tagansky Court has identified as part of the ongoing criminal proceedings. As a result, the total number of episodes linked to Shabutdinov has grown to fifty-seven within the same case file.
Earlier reports from respected agencies described new criminal proceedings being opened against the blogger on charges related to fraud. These reports, attributed to investigators from the country’s Internal Affairs Ministry, highlighted that the allegations revolve around deceitful schemes alleged to have caused material harm. The initial disclosures stirred a broader discussion about the case and its potential implications for the public figure involved. The authorities have framed these cases as separate but connected incidents within a single, sprawling investigation.
Observers noted that the court system moved to seize a part of Shabutdinov’s enforcement actions as a precaution while the investigation continued. In one of the more prominent developments, the court placed Shabutdinov under arrest in relation to a subset of the fraud-related charges, with the authorities estimating that the total damage from the schemes could be substantial. The accused has consistently maintained innocence, declining to acknowledge any wrongdoing as the process unfolds.
During the subsequent court session, the judges decided to extend the pretrial detention period for another two months to ensure the investigation could proceed without interruption. The extension effectively kept Shabutdinov in custody while investigators gather further evidence, interview witnesses, and verify financial records relevant to the case. The precise timeline of these rulings reflected the court’s approach to managing a complex, multi-episode inquiry.
In related remarks, Shabutdinov himself commented on the developments, insisting that his arrest was part of a broader pattern in the coverage surrounding his activities. His statements have contributed to ongoing public interest in the case and have been cited in various discussions about accountability, media influence, and the legal process in high-profile situations.