The Criminal Court has accepted a petition from seven asset management firms damaged by fraud committed by Stark Corporation, joining the prosecutor in filing criminal charges against the SET-listed company for eight offences of fraud and public deception.
Chavinda Hanratanakool, chairwoman of the Association of Investment Management Companies, said the seven companies invested in Stark by acquiring private placement shares. It appears Stark used the proceeds from the capital increase illegally, while issuing false financial statements to the public, she said.
As a result, funds managed by the seven firms were affected. The firms recently filed a petition with the Criminal Court to join the prosecutor in the criminal complaint against Stark and related companies, as well as executive directors and other individuals accused of committing offences.
In a case that rocked Thai corporations, the listed wire and cable manufacturing company and its former executives are suspected of fraud and trying to hide the company's accumulated loss of 12 billion baht during 2021-2022, of which 4 billion is reportedly negative shareholder equity.
According to Mrs Chavinda, the court on June 10 considered the evidence and issued permission for seven asset managers to join as plaintiffs with the prosecutor in three criminal cases concerning eight offences against Stark.
The first offence was filed against directors and executives for not performing their duties with responsibility, caution and honesty. The second charges directors, managers or persons responsible for the operations of a juristic person as dishonest and deceptive by presenting false statements to the public or concealing actual messages that should have been communicated.
The third offence refers to the managing director or person responsible for the operations of the juristic person, suggesting this person possessed the property of a juristic person and dishonestly took that asset for himself or herself, or for a third party.
The fourth charge is the managing director or person responsible for the juristic person acted or failed to act in order to seek unlawful benefits for himself or herself, or for others, causing damage to the juristic person.
Another charge concerns the managing director or person responsible for the juristic person creating accounts that were incomplete, inaccurate, not up to date, or non-factual in order to deceive the juristic person or shareholders from receiving appropriate benefits.
The sixth offence involves action that was assisted by others to commit crimes, according to the Securities and Exchange Act of 1992. The seventh offence is jointly committing fraud to deceive the public. The final offence concerns a person assigned to manage other people's property who acted dishonestly in breach of these duties.