After going to the Supreme Court for the 15th time to seek justice for her son who was killed 11 years ago, 76-year-old Bishnukumari Pandey said in despair, ‘If I get justice, I will sell even the small earring I have left.’ Every month, her pocket was empty when she traveled from Pokhara to Kathmandu. Anyone who could not hear well would hesitate to talk to her. That is why she told Kantipur a month ago that she was ready to sell even her earring if she wanted justice. The Supreme Court gave her justice on Wednesday. She did not have to sell even her earring. A bench of Justices Tek Prasad Dhungana and Meghraj Pokharel has upheld the 12-year prison sentence for Ramchandra Manandhar involved in the murder of Surya Bahadur Pandey on 5 Falgun 2071 at Tulsighat in Kaski and found the two accused, 26-year-old Maila alias Buddha Shrestha and 41-year-old Dhruv Manandhar guilty. According to Supreme Court spokesperson Arjun Koirala, Buddha and Dhruv Manandhar have been ordered to be imprisoned for 6 months under Section 17(3) of the then Civil Code relating to murder. According to this provision of the Civil Code, there is a provision for imprisonment from 6 months to 3 years for those who are present at the scene of the crime and do nothing else. Accordingly, the court has imposed a minimum sentence of 6 months on the two. In the case of Manandhar, the order of 12 years in prison given by the High Court has been upheld, Spokesperson Koirala said.

11 years ago, Bishnukumari's son Surya Bahadur, 25, had left home with his friends to attend the Shivaratri fair. The next morning, his body was found in a pool of blood on the cliff of the Ram Temple in Tulsighat.

Advocate Mohana Ansari, who argued on behalf of the victim, mentioned in the post-mortem report, ‘blood on his hair, bruises on his neck, etc.’. In her initial statement, Laxmi Devi Dhakal, also known as ‘Bahuni Aunty’, had also mentioned that Ramchandra Manandhar, Surya Bahadur Pandey and others were with him that day and went to her room around 9 pm to drink alcohol. ‘His statement speaks volumes about the incident,’ Ansari told the court, ‘His statement mentions that Pandey went out at around 1:30 am talking on his mobile phone, and Ramchandra Manandhar also left 4/5 minutes later without saying anything.’

She also said that about an hour after he left, Manandhar came to his room, grinning as if he was scared, and asked him to open the door. ‘Before entering the room, he washed his hands and feet in the water tap outside the room, came inside the room and slept without saying anything,’ her statement mentions.

The government lawyer from the Attorney General’s Office, who argued for the government, argued that Manandhar should be sentenced to life imprisonment, stating that there was an example of a lesser sentence being overturned in the case of Ranjan Koirala. But in the case of Manandhar, the higher court’s order was upheld.

After the murder of Surya Bahadur, Bishnukumari had filed a complaint against his three friends Ramchandra Manandhar, Buddha Shrestha and Dhruv Manandhar. But the police did not register a case for a long time. ‘It is strange that the police did not register this case for five years,’ said Advocate Ansari, ‘It seems that a supplementary report was also filed later.’

Since the case had been postponed 15 times earlier, Bishnukumari was not sure that the order would come on Wednesday either. She kept moving around the courtroom, showing the names of the judges who were on the case list earlier and asking for help to meet them. But in the afternoon, after the court found all three guilty, she cried with joy. ‘Mother, if you win the case, I will be happy,’ she told Kantipur, ‘I hope the remaining two are also arrested soon and sent to jail.’

Every time she appeared in court, Bishnukumari would take a bus from Pokhara to Kathmandu. She would go from the court administration to Singha Durbar and Baluwatar to get justice.

According to the complaint filed by Bishnukumari with the police, Surya Bahadur had an argument with Ramchandra Manandhar, Buddha Shrestha, and Dhruv Manandhar about Amrita Lama when they went to see the fair. The complaint mentions that her son Surya Bahadur was killed over the same issue.

In his statement to the police, the accused Shrestha said that Amrita Lama was hit by a stick thrown by him while eating sugarcane on 5 Falgun 2071 at around 7 pm. "She asked why he hit me, I hit him by mistake and scolded him," he said. "At that very place, Surya Bahadur Pandey, also known as Kattike, suddenly came to where I was and beat me up." He claims that Dhruv Manandhar came and separated him at that time.

Another accused, Ramchandra Manandhar, mentioned that Surya Bahadur and his friends were eating alcohol and meat on the night of the incident. "He had abused my girlfriend while we were together. At that time, I got angry and argued about why I abused her in the room where there were women," he told the investigating officer. "Surya Bahadur left the room after receiving a call at 1:30 am." Ramchandra says that after 'disturbing' them, he followed them to the Tulsighat bridge. "At that time, he hit me in the chest, then I also kicked and punched him and pushed him into the Seti River gorge on the right side of the road," he said. "After not hearing him scream for some time, I went to my friend's room and slept." He also changed his statement after appearing in court.

After the initial hearing, the Kaski District Court ordered the Manandhar duo and Shrestha to be remanded in custody for trial. However, they filed an appeal in the High Court against the district's order. The High Court overturned the district's order and ordered their release on a bail of Rs 100,000 on 5 Ashad 2076. Later, the District Court found Ramchandra Manandhar guilty. Shrestha and Dhruv Manandhar were acquitted on the ground that the charges against them were not sufficient. The government appealed against that order in the Pokhara High Court. A bench of Justices Shridhara Kumari Pudasaini and Pramod Kumar Shrestha Baidya on 13 Chaitra 2078 ordered the district court's decision to be upheld.