The question of the lawyer of the victim in the court: ”Who is the former home minister if not Ravi Lamichhane who took the loan?”

पुस १९, २०८१

दीपक परियार

The question of the lawyer of the victim in the court: ”Who is the former home minister if not Ravi Lamichhane who took the loan?”

Lawyers have argued on behalf of Zaherwala in the arrest against 7 people including Ravi Lamichhane in the Suryadarshan Cooperative fraud case. Senior advocates Dinesh Tripathi and Surendra Bhandari, advocates Yuvraj Parajuli, Ved Bahadur Bista, RC Gautam and Hari Kattel argued demanding that the seven people should be remanded in custody.

According to advocate Parajuli, who participated in the debate, the legal practitioner presented the grounds and reasons for sending the seven people to judicial custody. At that time, legal professionals submitted an argument regarding one crore rupees from Suryadarshan Sahakari going to the name of Ravi Lamichhane.

In the financial analysis report prepared by the expert team of Pokhara Metropolitan Municipality, it was mentioned that the loan went in the name of Lamichhane, while during the police investigation, it was found that the loan request form was filled in the name of Ravi Lamichhane. In the demand form, the address of Lamichhane is written in Pokhara-8 Srijan Chowk.

Regarding the lack of Lamichhane's signature on the demand form, the lawyer argued that the loan was withdrawn without completing the process with the intention of cheating. "Having taken out the loan by being a shareholder, holding a mortgage, and completing the paper process, there would not have been any fraud," said Advocate Parajuli, "the case has been filed because the money was taken with the intention of cheating." Ravi Lamichhane, who fills the form, has repeatedly said that he is not. "If it is not Ravi Lamichhane, the former deputy prime minister and home minister, who is the one who took the debt?," asked the lawyer from the plaintiff's side in the courtroom, "I am not that person, where did he (Lamichhane) apply so far?" break The lawyer presented the evidence in the court that even after resigning as the managing director of Gorkha Media Network, he cut checks and paid installments to various cooperatives. The lawyer argued that the law does not grant immunity because it has been proven that the money went from the cooperative to the Gorkha Media Network and the managing director and director had to find the source while spending the money.

It is seen from the documents attached to the missile that the defendants have embezzled the funds of the cooperative, the source of the assets has not been disclosed, there is a situation where the evidence can disappear if they are released on bail because they are 'high profile' people, even though there was only a case of cooperative fraud before, six people including the owner of Gorkha Media are on trial. Based on the concept of 'footing', legal practitioners argued that the seven people in custody should be remanded.

In the Suryadarshan Cooperative fraud case, Ravi Lamichhane, President of RSWP, former DIG Chavi Lal Joshi, GB Rai's assistant Leela Pachai, owner of Nature Herbs Ram Bahadur Khanal, Cooperative's founding ad hoc committee chairman and former state assembly member Meena Gurung, her father former vice president Krishna Bahadur Gurung, former treasurer Aarti Gurung of Kaski Police are in custody.

Advocate Parajuli said that the statements of the defendants were also broken. Chavi has burned Ravi and GB and Ravi has burned Chavi and GB. Ram Bahadur has tarnished the image,' he said, 'We argued in favor of sending the defendants to the preliminary investigation for all these grounds and reasons.'

दीपक परियार परियार कान्तिपुरका पोखरा संवाददाता हुन् ।

Link copied successfully