0%

AG Badal expresses dissatisfaction over reformation of Constitutional Bench

Khabarhub

June 6, 2021

4 MIN READ

AG Badal expresses dissatisfaction over reformation of Constitutional Bench

Attorney General Ramesh Badal. (File photo)

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

KATHMANDU: Attorney General Ramesh Badal has expressed dissatisfaction over Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana’s reformation of the Constitutional Bench.

Chief Justice (CJ) Rana constituted a Constitutional Bench on the basis of seniority, Sunday.

Judges Deepak Kumar Karki, Meera Khadka, Ishwor Prasad Khadka and Ananda Prasad Bhattarai have been included in the Constitutional Bench to hear the first hearing of the case against the dissolution of the House of Representatives.

Echoing the government lawyers demand that two justices of former Bench Deepak Kumar Karki and Ananda Mohan Bhattarai who had defied working in the previous bench should not be allowed to sit in the new Constitutional Bench, Attorney General Badal asked Chief Justice Rana why the court treated two parties of the case differently.

“Justice should be equal, how can it be that when a party objects to the presence of a judge the court listens to it, however, when another party raises a similar issue, the party is asked to remain quiet?” Badal said during the hearing on Sunday.

After the concern shown on the ‘conflict of interests’ of two justices in the previous Bench, Chief Justice Rana had reformed the Constitutional Bench comprising the senior justices in the Supreme Court roster.

The disgruntled lawyers of the government side have objected to the reformation of the Bench.

Senior advocate Sushil Pant, taking part as the lawyer from the government side, earlier objected to the reappointment of justices Karki and Bhattarai in the Bench.

Meanwhile, a lawyer close to Prime Minister KP Oli has raised questions in the bench that the judges of the newly formed Constitutional Bench cannot continue hearing on the writ petitions filed against the dissolution of the House of Parliament.

Earlier, lawyers including Rajaram Ghimire, who had filed a writ demanding the appointment of Prime Minister as per Article 76 (5) had filed a case claiming the justices in the newly formed Bench can not continue the ongoing hearing on the writ petitions filed against HoR dissolution.

After the government attorneys’ concern on the issue, Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana urged the government lawyers to withdraw the case.

“You have the obligation to maintain the dignity of the Bench,” Chief Justice Rana said addressing the government lawyers, “If you do not withdraw the case, you might be sued on defamation allegation.”

Meanwhile, challenging Friday’s cabinet reshuffle, a writ petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking its annulment.

Senior Advocate Dinesh Tripathi filed a writ petition seeking annulment of the new appointments, reshuffle, and division of work in the cabinet as made by President Bidya Devi Bhandari in the recommendation of the Council of Ministers.

In his writ, senior advocate Tripathi has argued that the latest cabinet reshuffle and the appointment of the new ministers and their work division is fraudulent and contradict the spirit of many articles of the Constitution including, Article 2, 74, 77 (C) and deserves annulment.

0