This was the debate in the court about the citizenship of Kantipur President Sirohia

Sirohia side's reply

I am a sovereign Nepali citizen born in Dhanusha on 29th November 2019. I received school education from local Saraswati Mavi and college education from Ramswaroop Ramsagar Multipurpose Campus Janakpur. It is my constitutional right to get a citizenship ID card. I received citizenship number 39698886 from the district administration office on August 25, 2036 from the authorized body according to the law. Since the citizenship that was distributed in Nepali paper at that time was old, I also took a copy on October 29, 2057.

But, I have taken only one citizenship. My national identity card, driver's license and voter's identity card have been issued based on the citizenship I received from the authorized body of the state of Nepal. It has been almost 44 years since I got this citizenship. Apart from this, there was no other case of citizenship. However, even though there are rumors in the market that Kailash Sirohia, the president of Kantipur, has taken two or three citizenships, even the police administration and the government officials have not made such accusations. Such wild rumors have been automatically refuted by this charge sheet. For this, our side would like to thank the police administration and the public prosecutor.

Based on the only citizenship I have received, I have also taken a national identity card from an agency under the Ministry of Home Affairs on February 15, 2079. When I took this identity card from Singha Darbar Kathmandu, the district administration office helped me by sending the necessary details as the citizenship records were requested. I have also taken passports on different dates. Even in that process, the administration has helped me. My citizenship number is the same in my national identity card and passport.

As far as the issue of my citizenship number matching with another person's citizenship number is concerned, it is not within my control. After the citizenship certificate is given to me, the entire responsibility is on the state. The number of the certificate is not a matter of choice of any customer. If the number matches with someone else's certificate, I have no role. Its entire control, responsibility and accountability rests with District Administration Office Dhanusha.

allegation 2

In the reply received from the District Administration Office, Dhanusha, in the adult record dated 033/34, it appears that the names of citizens born in the Kingdom of Nepal to foreign parents are registered in the register of citizenships, and the children of Ghasiram Marwari (Sirohia) Gopal Prasad Sirohia, Govind Prasad Sirohia and Punam Kumari Sirohia have been recognized as Nepalese citizens. It is said that the citizenship of Kailash Prasad Sirohia is Nepali by birth.

Sirohia side's reply

My father was a well-known entrepreneur in Janakpur area. He was the founder general secretary of Janakpur Industry and Commerce Association. He was in this role continuously from 2009 to 2034. This topic is not only proved by the family and society, but also by the history of Janakpur Industry and Commerce Association. My father got citizenship on June 1, 2010. At that time, Citizenship Act 2009 and Rules 2009 were in force in Nepal. Born in 2019, I am a descendant citizen as my father acquired naturalized citizenship on 1st June 2010. This identification is my legal right. In 2033/34, mobile teams were deployed for citizenship distribution and citizenship was distributed to those who reached the age of majority. But the team also collected records of minors. So when the team came in 2033/34, even though I did not get citizenship, my records were also collected. That basis has been revealed in my citizenship.

The citizenship of me and my brothers was not issued at the same time. Citizenship laws that were changing every decade resulted in different types of citizenship. Again, the type of citizenship of the children born before and after the father acquired citizenship may have also changed. I do not have to answer about the laws prevailing at that time and the granting of citizenship by the authorized authorities under the law. I am accountable, responsible and honest towards my citizenship. This is the topic I have to answer.

allegation 3

Kailash Sirohia On August 29, 2057, when taking a copy of the citizenship, it was found that the signature of the authorized officer was not found in the record book (Dhadda) of the District Administration Office Dhanusha with a photograph, and the age of 18 years was mentioned in the date of birth. It is seen that the date of birth is not mentioned in the record.

Sirohia side's reply

The citizenship I am using was obtained from the authority of the state. It is my responsibility to use the citizenship given by the state only according to the law, if it is misused, I am ready to face punishment according to the law. But it is not my responsibility to manage and control the record book (Dhadda) of the state. Every year, the state allocates a large budget and operates an office to manage and regulate every record book (Dhadda) of citizens.

Therefore, the main responsibility of protecting such records is the state. If there is access to the records of the state, if the government records are overturned due to someone's carelessness or corruption, the relevant agency should take all responsibility for it. When I took the citizenship, the state agency granted me the citizenship only on the basis that I fulfilled all the qualifications prescribed by the law and provided the necessary evidence. Now, if it is not protected, the responsibility should be the negligent office or official. The state cannot keep its record book (Dhadda) correct, but the citizens should take the blame? This is not a judicial argument. This is just an attempt to discourage citizens. I do not support this.

allegation 4

In the copy of citizenship received by Kailash Sirohia, it was found that 18 years (2019/08/29) was also written in the date of birth, but the shape of the number mentioned in the date of birth did not match with the shape of the age and other numbers mentioned in the copy, and the date of birth was added later. Seemed to be working.

Sirohia side's reply

Like most of the citizens, the letters of the staff who filled the details and the officer who verified it with their signature look different in my citizenship. While the employee who filled the details wrote the age only 18 years, the certifying officer seems to have written the date of birth inside the cost. However, the lettering within the coast is closed by a red signature on both sides. This citizenship certificate is safe with me. I don't need to be arrested for such an investigation. Earlier, when giving citizenship, age was given, but later date of birth was started. When the citizenship was given in 2036, the age was written only 18 years, but when the copy was given in 2057, it was written 18 years, and the date of birth was also mentioned in the coast. It is a matter within the jurisdiction of the state. I am not subject to arrest.

Allegation 5

It was found that 2036/05/25 and 18 years were mentioned in the date of birth of the citizenship certificate obtained by Kailash Prasad Sirohia for the first time, but in the first copy of the citizenship certificate obtained by him on 2057/06/29, 18 was mentioned in the date of birth. As the date of birth was found to be written on 29/08/2019, when calculating the age between age, date of birth and the date of issuance of citizenship, it was found that 16 years and 8 months did not match the mentioned age of 18 years.

Sirohia's answer

I went to get the citizenship certificate after becoming an adult according to the law. The state granted me citizenship after looking at my records, qualifications and certificates. The state does not write the age I choose by will. The state will issue the citizenship certificate after verifying all the evidence and determining the age. No citizen gets any certificate until proof is provided. It is not fair to question the service provider about the certificate issued by the state itself.

allegation 6

Kailash Sirohia's record of documents to be submitted when taking citizenship was not found.

Sirohia side's reply

Is citizenship granted even without submitting the documents to be submitted when taking citizenship? I do not distrust the state to this extent. Sir, our side is ready to help in every investigation done by the state. If you had been called to say that such a condition was seen in your citizenship, we were ready to appear any day and clarify our issues, that is also our duty. However, even once, he was arrested by deploying armed police directly to the office of the media where I am the president. Supposedly, the country will suffer irreparable damage if not arrested on that day. This is an extreme abuse of state power. It is also an encroachment of the inalienable rights given to citizens by the laws of the country. Our side also says that if there is any question about citizenship and we are ready to be present and help in the investigation when called by the court or the police. The

jurisprudence says that only such person should be arrested, which is likely to destroy evidence or cause further harm to an affected person. It's been 44 years since I got citizenship as an adult citizen, what harm does it do to the law now that I'm out of prison? Second, what effect can a citizen have on the evidence contained in the records under the control of the state? So there is no reason to arrest. If there is an intention to arrest, we demand that the court should intervene and protect the personal freedom and constitutional rights of citizens.

At the beginning, middle and end of the debate, Sirohia's advocates repeatedly tried to connect the issues of the country's interior minister, the passports of two countries he was carrying and the misappropriation of the cooperative's savings. But when Judge Churaman Khadka asked to keep only the relevant issues, the advocates said that all these are relevant issues related to Sirohia's arrest and put their side as follows:

Sir, this is not a dispute over Kailash Sirohia's citizenship. Instead, Home Minister Ravi Lamichhane, dual citizenship, passports of two countries and common people's savings in co-operatives are related to embezzlement. Kantipur, where I am the president, has also aired a news publication about Lamichhane, who renounced his Nepalese citizenship, becoming the country's parliamentarian, deputy prime minister and home minister, just like all responsible media. How serious and sensitive that issue was has been proven by the decision of the Constitutional Bench of the Supreme Court. The bench declared his citizenship invalid and freed him from all public positions.

The country's constitution and laws were not written by Kantipur or any media. But if it is written about, the media has an important responsibility to remind the subject. But it is because of this duty that Lamichhane held a press conference and slandered the Nepali media. He also publicly apologized for the same after a year. But around that time, the news of misappropriation of cooperative savings started coming. Misappropriation of cooperative savings is not a common issue, sir. 7.1 million common people of this country need education of children, treatment of parents and is excess of savings accumulated for your future.

The fact that Lamichhane is the shareholder, director and managing director of the said company when the funds of about half a dozen cooperatives were illegally brought to Gorkha Media Network Pvt. Lamichhane's involvement in the misappropriation of cooperative savings is also clear from the study of Pokhara metropolis, CIB report and the indictment filed in Rupandehi District Court. But the Nepali media has been publishing news that Home Minister Lamichhane has suppressed the investigation into the misappropriation of public savings and has obstructed further investigation. Nepali media will remain steadfast in this duty.

On the other hand, the investigation of passport misuse falls under the Ministry of Home Affairs. But Lamichhane, who carries passports of two countries, has become the home minister of this country. The media is writing news about whether this case is an attack on the country's constitution and laws. However, on the morning of the day Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal took the vote of confidence on Chait 6, 2079, the Attorney General's Office decided not to prosecute Lamichhane on the issue of dual passport. The Supreme Court of the country has already taken notice of a person holding two passports.

The hearing of the petition filed in the Supreme Court against the decision of the Attorney General's Office is being heard in the Supreme Court. But our question is only this, a person who carries dual citizenship and passport of two countries will be the home minister and the sovereign citizen of this country should be arrested overnight to seek his revenge? And this country and citizens have to sit and watch? When the government forgets its duty in frenzy or vindictiveness, citizens and the mass media raise their voices. Because he trusts, the country has a court to protect civil rights.