Badikov Kirill Vladimirovich

Badikov Kirill Vladimirovich

Biography

2025: Sentence - 7 years in prison for embezzlement of 2.4 billion rubles

On December 23, 2025, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Bashkortostan, on the appeal of the prosecutor's office, toughened the sentence in a criminal case of fraud on an especially large scale during the construction of the Moskovsky residential complex in Ufa. The amount of damage amounted to 2.4 billion rubles.

The main person involved in the case is the head of the Gosstroy Group of Companies and ex-deputy of the Ufa City Council Kirill Badikov. According to Vedomosti, his accomplices were the ex-general director of Bashnaftatrans Igor Tyurin and the former financial director of Gosstroy Management Pavel Stepanov. In April 2025, the Oktyabrsky District Court of Ufa sentenced Badikov to 5.5 years in a general regime colony, and sentenced Tyurina and Stepanova to suspended sentences. The Supreme Court of the republic overturned these decisions.

Kirill Badikov was sentenced to eight years in prison, Igor Tyurin - seven years, Pavel Stepanov - six. All convicts were taken into custody in the courtroom. They also retain the obligation to pay fines: 1 million rubles for Badikov, 800 thousand rubles for Tyurin and 500 thousand rubles for Stepanov.

According to the investigation, the crime was committed between 2013 and 2021. The defendants attracted funds from citizens and legal entities, concluding contracts for shared construction, paenokopaniya and concessions of rights. These financial schemes were actually a fraud, since the obligations for the construction of housing were not fulfilled. As a result of the actions of the organized group, 1.1 thousand victims were injured.

Anastasia Pervakova, a representative of the law firm "Trace," noted that there was a judicial practice of toughening penalties for fraud on an especially large scale, especially when crimes affect the interests of a large number of citizens. In her opinion, the appellate courts often agree with the arguments of the prosecutor's office or victims about the excessive leniency of the initial sentences.^[1][2][3][4]

Notes