Hearing underway on the case against the Property Investigation Commission

Questioning the legitimacy of the Commission for the Investigation of Property, advocate Premraj Silwal had filed writ petitions at the Supreme Court on Baisakh 15 and 29. The hearing on those writs had been under consideration since last Wednesday.

Ashad 26, 2083

Durga Dulal

Hearing underway on the case against the Property Investigation Commission

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 Supreme Court is hearing the case regarding the legitimacy of the Property Investigation Commission formed under the leadership of former Supreme Court justices by the government led by Balendra Shah.

The hearing on the writ petitions filed by advocate Premraj Silwal on April 27 and May 12 at the Supreme Court, questioning the legitimacy of the Property Investigation Commission, had been under consideration since last Wednesday.

On Wednesday, arguments were presented on behalf of the writ petitioners. After the arguments by advocate Anantaraj Luintel, senior advocate and former Attorney General Ramesh Badal also presented his arguments. As arguments from other legal professionals remained, the case was kept under consideration. After further arguments on Friday, the Supreme Court will deliver its decision regarding the legitimacy of the commission.

The writ petitions claim that the decision to form the commission was illegal. They argue that a commission formed under the Commission of Inquiry Act cannot investigate individuals' property, and that it is unconstitutional for a former Supreme Court justice to lead such a commission.

Similarly, it is claimed that the government's decision conflicts with the jurisdiction of the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority and with the Supreme Court's verdict to dissolve the Royal Commission. The writ petitions demand the dissolution of the commission.

Durga

Link copied successfully