The case was adjourned after the arguments between the writ petitioner and the government lawyer concluded in the bench of Supreme Court Justices Sharanga Subedi and Sunil Kumar Pokharel, leaving Lamichhane's legal practitioner and the writ petitioner with insufficient time to present their counter arguments.
We use Google Cloud Translation Services. Google requires we provide the following disclaimer relating to use of this service:
This service may contain translations powered by Google. Google disclaims all warranties related to the translations, expressed or implied, including any warranties of accuracy, reliability, and any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, and noninfringement.
The writ petition against Attorney General Savita Bhandari's decision to amend the charge sheet related to money laundering and organized crime involving Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) President Rabi Lamichhane has been kept on hold for Tuesday after the second day of debate.
After the arguments of the writ petitioner and government lawyer concluded in the bench of Supreme Court Justices Sharanga Subedi and Sunil Kumar Pokharel, Lamichhane's legal practitioner and the writ petitioner did not have time to present their counter arguments.
On Sunday, Attorney General Bhandari herself argued, while on Monday, Deputy Attorneys General Sanjiv Raj Regmi, Lokraj Parajuli, Khemraj Gyawali and Uddhav Raj Pudasaini, among others, argued on behalf of the government. Senior advocates Sushil Panta, Raman Shrestha and advocate Dipendra Jha, among others, have filed their legal briefs on behalf of Lamichhane. Supreme Court spokesperson Arjun Koirala said that the bench had kept the matter under review after the time ran out.
The writ petition filed by senior advocate Dinesh Tripathi, law student Ayush Badal and Yubaraj Poudel Safal sought to quash the decision of the Attorney General's Office, calling it 'prima facie illegal, malicious and arbitrary'.
Attorney General Savita Bhandari had decided on 30 Poush 2082 to amend the charge sheet so that the claims of 'organized crime' and 'wealth laundering' in the cases filed against Lamichhane in the Kaski, Kathmandu, Rupandehi and Parsa district courts would no longer stand.
In that decision, the argument was presented that Lamichhane was charged on the basis of political vendetta and that the interests of savers should be given priority.
The writ petitioner claims that even though Section 36 of the Criminal Procedure Code was used as the basis for the amendment of the charge, it is in fact an act of ‘withdrawal of the case’. The writ petition argues that the decision was made as a ‘fraudulent use of the law’ when Section 116 of the Code prohibits the withdrawal of cases related to money laundering.
The writ petition states that granting immunity in serious economic crimes like money laundering will put Nepal on the blacklist of the International Financial Action Task Force and this will cause irreparable damage to the country.
It has also been argued that amending the charge in cases such as organized crime and money laundering that cannot be settled will deprive thousands of savers of their right to justice.
