Vasekin Vasily Vasilyevich

Vasekin Vasily Vasilyevich

Biography

2025

Detention in fraud case

In September 2025, law enforcement agencies detained the general director of the Supermetal plant Vasily Vasekin in Solnechnogorsk at the exit from the hospital, where he was treated after two heart operations. Vasekin is accused of fraud in the amount of ₽52 million and violation of the rules for surrendering precious metals to the state for ₽2,4 billion.

According to RBC, information about the detention was confirmed by Vasekin's lawyer Oleg Ilyin and the accused's daughter Natalya. The criminal case has been considered in the Solnechnogorsk City Court since April 2025, but the process was twice suspended due to the serious health of the defendant.

Vasily Vasekin is accused under Part 4 of Article 159 of the Criminal Code of Russia of especially large-scale fraud together with his deputy Sergei Perelman. The investigation believes that the heads of the enterprise deceived partner Alexei Bratchenko for ₽52 million when concluding a deal to acquire a stake in the business.

According to the prosecution, Bratchenko planned to become a co-owner of Supermetal and was supposed to gain access to the plant's shares after the liquidation of the owner of the Basalt Fiber Institute. However, this company was not liquidated, which led to a dispute over the nature of the transaction.

Vasekin claimed that Bratchenko acquired a stake in the Basalt Fiber Institute, and not in Supermetal, while the transaction amount was ₽200 thousand, not ₽52 million. The defense emphasizes that the case is based solely on Bratchenko's testimony without additional evidence.

Ilyin's lawyer explained that the charges are based on the testimony of one person. Vasekin's daughter Natalya noted that only the testimony of witnesses who did not see the funds and do not know the purpose of the plaintiff's arrival at the enterprise appear in the case file.^[1]

Sentence - 5 years in prison for major fraud

On October 30, 2025, the Solnechnogorsk City Court of the Moscow Region sentenced Vasily Vasekin, co-owner of the Supermetal research and production complex, to 5 years in a general regime colony with a penalty of 1 million rubles.

This information was provided to Vedomosti by the convict's lawyer Oleg Ilyin. According to him, Vasily Vasekin was found guilty of committing crimes under Part 4 of Art. 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (fraud on an especially large scale) and Art. 192 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation (violation of the rules for surrendering precious metals and stones to the state). The total amount of damage in the case exceeded 2.4 billion rubles.

𝓲

Фото: Freepik

Vasekin's subordinate, Sergei Perelman, was an accomplice in the fraud case. He received 3.5 years in a general regime colony with a similar fine.

A criminal case was opened in 2023. The investigation established that the defendants sold to business partner Alexei Bratchenko a 21% stake in the authorized capital of Institute of Basalt Fibers LLC (IBV), which owns 100% of the shares of NPK Supermetal JSC.

Bratchenko transferred 52 million rubles in cash to Vasekin and Perelman, but the amount of 200 thousand rubles was indicated in the contract. After the transaction was executed, the victim did not receive the declared asset, and the money deposited was not returned to him.

Ilyin insists on the absence of evidence of fraud, since the funds received from Bratchenko were intended to be invested in a new project - Magmanit LLC.

The lawyer also disagrees with Vasekin's accusation of violating the rules for surrendering precious metal alloys to the state from the Irish company Mafic Black Basalt Limited and the Latvian JSC Valmiersk Fiberglass. Ilyin claims that obligations to hand over precious metals did not arise, since their extraction from imported recyclable materials was not carried out.

The court also satisfied the civil claim of Alexei Bratchenko to recover 52 million rubles from the convicts in compensation for damage. A lawyer has filed an appeal against the judgment.^[2]

Notes