KATHMANDU: The Supreme Court, on Sunday, has ordered the retrieval of new evidence that was cited when the Office of the Attorney General approved the withdrawal of money laundering and organized crime charges against Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP) chairperson Rabi Lamichhane and his business partners.
A bench comprising Justices Manoj Kumar Sharma and Shrikant Poudel issued the order, directing the Attorney General’s Office to submit the files containing the newly discovered evidence that formed the basis for amending the charge sheet and withdrawing the cases.
The order followed arguments by Attorney General Sabita Bhandari, who told the court that additional evidence had been found after the charge sheet was filed, prompting the decision to revise it.
“In light of the Attorney General’s submission that additional evidence was discovered after the filing of the charge sheet and that a decision was taken to amend it, the original documents and evidence related to such amendment shall be retrieved from the Office of the Attorney General and presented for discussion on the interim order in accordance with the law,” the bench stated in its order.
Attorney General Bhandari and Deputy Attorney General Sanjeev Raj Regmi appeared in court to defend the decision to withdraw the cases against Lamichhane and his partners, who are accused in a cooperative fraud case.
Senior advocates Sushil Pant and Raman Shrestha argued on behalf of Lamichhane, while senior advocates Dinesh Tripathi and Tikaram Bhattarai represented the petitioners.
The Office of the Attorney General had decided on Poush 30 to withdraw the serious charges against Lamichhane, a move that critics say was taken under the political backing of the incumbent government.
Challenging the decision, senior advocate Tripathi, law student Ayush Badal, and Yubaraj Poudel Safal filed writ petitions on Magh 4, seeking its annulment. The petitions argue that the decision was “prima facie illegal, mala fide, and arbitrary.”
Earlier, on Magh 6, a single bench of Justice Abdul Aziz Musalman had sought a written response from the Office of the Attorney General. A hearing scheduled for Magh 8 before a bench of Justices Sharma and Bal Krishna Dhakal was deferred after Justice Dhakal declined to hear the case, leading to a temporary halt in proceedings.On Sunday, the court convened both sides to discuss whether an interim order should be issued. Following the Attorney General’s arguments, the bench ordered the retrieval of the cited evidence before proceeding further.
The case will now move forward after the Attorney General’s Office submits the requested documents to the court.
Comment