The Supreme Court has refused to release former Home Minister and RSVP Chairman Ravi Lamichhane and former DIG of Nepal Police Chabilal Joshi who are in Ruppandehi Jail pending trial in the cooperative fraud case. Based on the immediate evidence, Lamichhane and Joshi are not guilty, as there is no basis to release them from prison, the joint bench of Supreme Court Justices Nahkul Subedi and Balkrishna Dhakal decided.

The Supreme Court on Friday upheld the order given by Judge Ramesh Dhakal and Sanka Parajuli of the Butwal Bench of the High Court Tulsipur to send Lamichhane and Joshi to remand.

Rupandehi District Court ordered Lamichhane to be released on a bond of Rs 10 crore in a case related to the fraud of the Supreme Cooperative of Butwal on January 13. Overruling the said order, the Butwal Bench of the High Court Tulsipur ordered Lamichhane to be detained on March 22. A

order was issued. Lamichhane was arrested soon after. In the case of Lamichhane, Mrs. Nikita Paudel filed a writ of imprisonment. It has been dismissed by the Supreme Court. 

Lamichhane and Joshi filed a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court against the Butwal Bench of the Tulsipur High Court. Hearing on it, the Supreme Court on Friday decided not to release him from prison.

"There is no reasonable basis to believe that these defendants are not guilty of the alleged crime from the evidence obtained immediately," the Supreme Court's judgment said, "Therefore, the order of 22 Chait 2081, which ordered Lamichhane and Joshi to be held in custody for preliminary investigation and set aside the case as determined by the court, should not be revoked if it is not found to be a crime, according to the law."

The Supreme Court has decided to keep Lamichhane in prison citing eight grounds and reasons. It is mentioned in the judgment that Lamichhane was involved in the management of the company since he held 15 percent shares of Gorkha Media Network Pvt. Ltd., took a loan of 2 million rupees from Supreme Cooperative to buy the same shares, and did not complete any process according to the law while taking the loan. Similarly, although Lamichhane insisted that he had no involvement in the financial transactions before he was appointed as the managing director of the company, the Supreme Court also said that he operated a bank account before that, and the same account received money from the cooperative several times.  It is mentioned in the judgment of the Supreme Court that although he said that he did not know about the money coming from the cooperative in the

company and even in his own name, he paid Rs. The Supreme Court has mentioned in the judgment that Lamichhane signed the checks as the account manager of the company even after that date despite insisting that he had separated from the company. 

Lamichhane's involvement is seen not only as an employee but also as having a fundamental impact on the company's operation, the statement of the co-defendants and the incident description and paper evidence show that there is no reasonable basis to believe that Lamichhane is not guilty of the alleged crime.

It is seen that Lamichhane was in the company from 2nd October 2077 to 1st June 2079 in the capacity of managing director, shareholder and director. Among them, the loan account of the cooperative organization in the name of the defendant Lamichhane no. "There is no dispute about the fact that two crore rupees of loan was provided from 001-001-005-0000224," said the Supreme Court's verdict.

Although Lamichhane denied that he was aware of the money coming from Gorkha Media and the cooperative organization in his own name, the Supreme Court mentioned that Nissa Misil was involved in paying Rs. By paying the loan to the cooperative, "the defendant's statement that he did not know anything about the loan transaction with the cooperative was disproved," the judgment said. 

Lamichhane's involvement in Gorkha media has also been disputed by the Supreme Court. Although Lamichhane claimed that he had no involvement in the financial transactions before he was appointed as the managing director of the company only on 30 December 2077, it was seen that he attended the meeting of the board of directors on 2 October 2077 as an executive director before being appointed as the managing director of the company. It appears that the decision was made to operate the account by signature,'' the verdict states, 'when it was seen that money was received from the cooperative organization in the account of the company opened according to the same decision, it was seen that this petitioner was involved in the financial transaction of taking money from the cooperative organization even before he became the managing director. Although Lamichhane claimed that he got 15 percent of the company's shares for free as per the terms of joining Gorkha Media, in the investment source form that he verified and submitted to the official body, it is written in the judgment that he has invested 18 million shares from 'income from other businesses, debt settlement and ancestral property'.

"His statement that he received shares for free is not supported by the evidence attached to Missil," the judgment said, "but it appears that the defendant took a loan from a cooperative organization to purchase the same shares." While taking the loan, it was not seen at first glance that any process according to the existing laws including the cooperative act, rules and regulations of the organization was completed.

Lamichhane gave a statement that he separated from Gorkha Media on 1 June 2079, but even after that, it was seen that he signed the check as the company's account manager. "Lamichhane's involvement in the said company was seen not only in the capacity of an employee but also in the capacity of substantially affecting the operation of the company," said the judgment.

Similarly, the Supreme Court has mentioned that there is no dispute about the fact that former DIG Joshi is the founder shareholder and director of Gorkha Media. The Supreme Court also said that since the establishment of the company till 22 October 2078, it was seen that the company was affiliated to the said company, and during that period, it was seen that various amounts of money were received from the cooperative organization in the name of the said company. Loan account no. It seems that 25 million loans have been made from 001001-105-0000211,' said the Supreme Court. 

It is mentioned in the judgment of the Supreme Court that even though Joshi gave a statement that he had no involvement in the loan and that all the financial transactions were done by the defendants GB Rai and Ravi Lamichhane, it was not credible. It is mentioned in the judgment of the Supreme Court that it cannot be believed that there is no involvement in the bank account opened under Joshi's signature as it has been seen that money has been received from Supreme Cooperative in his name many times. 

High Court Tulsipur, Butwal Bench Judges Ramesh Dhakal and Sankee Parajuli, the Supreme Court has said that it has taken serious notice of the comments regarding the order of 22 March. During the discussion of the writ filed by Lamichhane and Joshi, the government lawyer and legal professionals present on behalf of Zaherwala drew attention to the comments made on the judge.