Advocate Premraj Silwal has filed a contempt petition, alleging that the Property Investigation Commission issued a notice published on Ashad 29, which was contrary to the order given by the joint bench of Justices Tek Prasad Dhungana and Shrikant Poudel of the Supreme Court on Ashad 26.
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.
A contempt petition has been filed against the Assets Investigation Commission, including its chairperson Rajendra Kumar Bhandari, for publishing information contrary to the Supreme Court's order. The petition states that the commission did not comply with the court's order on Asad 29 and interpreted it in its own way.
The contempt petition was filed by advocate Premraj Silwal. Following the Supreme Court's order, the commission had issued a notice requiring all persons except sitting judges, former judges, and retired officers of the Nepal Army to submit their property details.
Advocate Silwal filed the contempt petition after the Assets Investigation Commission issued a notice on Asad 29, which was contrary to the order of the Supreme Court's joint bench of Justices Tek Prasad Dhungana and Shrikant Poudel on Asad 26.
Commission chairperson Bhandari and members Purushottam Parajuli, Chandiraj Dhakal, Ganesh K.C. The petition has sought legal action against Prakash Lamsal and the Property Commission for contempt.
The petition states that the Property Commission published the notice ignoring the sensitivity and context of the case, constitutional and legal questions, precedents and principles laid down by the court, questions used in the full text of the order, the words used in the entire order mentioned in the order, and the seriousness and spirit of the order.
‘It is illegal to publish a public notice in a way that completely disregards and insults the order by arbitrarily and arbitrarily interpreting it in a wrong and misleading manner,’ the petition states. ‘It is seen that the chairman and members should be punished for their intention and action to continue the work/proceedings of the Commission as it is, contrary to the interim order, by twisting the court order in a way that makes it meaningless.’
Article 128, Clause 4 of the Constitution of Nepal states that contempt of court orders will be prosecuted and punished. Section 17 (1) of the Administration of Justice Act, 2073 states that the Supreme Court may initiate proceedings for contempt of court if anyone obstructs its own and the High Court or District Court's judicial administration or disobeys an order or judgment.
Sub-section (3) of the same section states that contempt of court may be prosecuted. Sub-section (4) states that if contempt is found, the offender may be imprisoned for up to 1 year or fined up to ten thousand or both or other appropriate order. The Supreme Court has referred the case against the Property Investigation Commission to the full bench.
