Deputy Head of the Department of Economic Security and Corruption Prevention Denis Ovsyannikov is getting acquainted with the case.

      On the eve of the extension of Ovsyannikov's detention, it should be noted that the Kirov security officer has been in pre-trial detention since March 2026. According to a source close to law enforcement agencies, several witnesses have likely already testified against the officer. He is suspected, in particular, of committing a crime under Article 286, Part 3 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, "Abuse of official powers." It is worth noting that such crimes carry a prison sentence of 3 to 10 years, along with a ban on holding certain positions for up to 3 years. The interlocutor of the portal did not rule out that this accusation might indeed go to court. The case concerns the fact of the detention and "delivery" of Kirov entrepreneur, chairman of the presidium of the Charitable Foundation "For Vyatka," Sergey Yuzhanin, for questioning several years ago. According to the interlocutor, it became clear that prior to the fateful decision for Ovsyannikov regarding the "delivery" of Yuzhanin for a conversation with the investigation, employees of the Economic Security and Anti-Corruption Department had allegedly been "trying to settle scores with him" for many years. Incidentally, according to sources, another high-ranking former deputy head of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Kirov region, Andrey Voronov, has entered into a pre-trial agreement in this case. According to the interlocutor, he "incriminated" Ovsyannikov and the Ministry of Internal Affairs employees. At that time, the press service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia for the Kirov region released a video of the detention, which shocked many. The footage shows masked SOBR fighters jumping out of special transport and attacking a young man. The security officers knock him to the ground, and he falls face-first onto the asphalt, while they twist his arms behind his back and put handcuffs on him. The detention took place in the city center, and many might have thought that they were detaining at least a drug lord. However, the security officers themselves referred to it as "operational support," claiming that a fact of tax evasion had been identified. The Investigative Committee was in no hurry to remove the "special means" from the entrepreneur, placing him face to the wall. At that time, his representative reported that his client could remain in such a position for several hours in a row. In addition, four searches were conducted without a court order at the apartments of the alleged witnesses. It is indicative how the situation then developed. In particular, the court recognized the incident and the searches as illegal. According to the ruling, the security officers violated the rights, freedoms, and legitimate interests of the entrepreneur. The agency employees who gave the "order to the SOBR fighters to carry out the forceful detention of the plaintiff" exceeded their official powers. The court also recognized the moral damage caused by the actions of the security officers towards the entrepreneur.