Even though it is a regular procedure for the higher court to review the judgment of the lower level court, the reversal of some cases can be felt by legal experts and common people to be unnatural. The case involving former minister Mohammad Aftab Alam is a similar context.

Even though the district court has ruled on the charge of burning the injured in the bomb blast and sentenced them to life imprisonment, the high court's acquittal has raised questions. Judiciary cannot remain silent by ignoring the reaction of the public that the verdict of the court is not natural in a case that shakes human sensibilities. It undermines trust and respect for the court. Therefore, it is expected that the Justice Council will discuss and give appropriate conclusions regarding High Court Judges Khushi Prasad Tharu and Arjun Maharjan. 

Alam, who was a candidate for the Congress in the Constituent Assembly elections held on 28th March 2064, planned to create a bomb with the aim of winning the election by seizing the booth by scaring the voters of the opposition party. Accordingly, on March 27, an explosion occurred in the shed of Congress leader and Alam's uncle Sheikh Idris located in Rajapur Fardahwa-4, Sabik Rajapur, Rautahat, while making a bomb. It is alleged that Trilokpratap Singh Rajput and OC Akhtar Mian of Saruatha village in Yamunamai Rural Municipality who were injured were thrown alive into the chimney of Raja Brick Industry. Various eyewitness accounts and circumstantial evidence, from those involved in making the bomb to the incident of putting the injured in the chimney, provide a strong basis for the incident and Alam's involvement in it.

Gauri Shankar Ram Chamar, who was working in Alamkai brick kiln and came to collect his wages that day, has given a statement in the court that he saw about a dozen people sitting in Idris's shed and that he was also injured in the explosion at the same time. Shiv Shah Kanu, who reached there after the explosion, has given a statement that he saw people scattered at the scene and saw Alam and others there, but he was sent away after being abused.

Similarly, Sarajul Mian has said that 1/2 people were killed in the bomb blast, others were injured and Pintu and Akhtar Mian were injured as well. Rajesh Prasad Sahni, who works at Raja Brick Industry, said that on the night of March 27, 2064, he woke up due to the sound of explosion, people playing, shouting and running and the sound of tractors. When he woke up, he saw the leader Mohammad Aftab Alam, his brother Mohammad Mahtab Alam, Badri Sahni and saw that the people who were brought in sacks were taken out in turn and put in the brick making pit.

Such different statements also provide a strong basis for Alam's involvement. Because this is not a baseless accusation made by someone. There are strong grounds such as the abundance of eyewitnesses, the injured, and the absence of any other evidence that the person who was allegedly thrown into the brick kiln was alive. This description is an established fact, even the district court has taken it as evidence. At the same time, the incident seems to have happened during the Supreme Court's orders to investigate on 16 June 2069 and 6 June 2076.

Setting aside strong factual evidence, Alam has been released by the High Court's decision. It is natural for him to claim that he has been vindicated. But in this case, the justice system itself is also seeking justice. It needs to be demonstrated. First, it is the practice of the Judicial Council to investigate judges who have been involved in activities contrary to official conduct and who have given judgments that have been publicly disputed and criticized. Some are even drawn to work in the Justice Council Secretariat. However, judges are known to resign after the investigation begins.

According to the order given by the Supreme Court, the High Court of Pokhara, who had ordered to change the jurisdiction in the Gorkha Brewery tax dispute case, brought Jeevanhari Adhikari, Nar Bahadur Shahi and Ramchandra Yadav to the Justice Council. But Adhikari and Yadav had resigned in between. In the case of Shahi, the conclusion of 'bad conduct' was recommended for dismissal. 

Secondly, Srinarayan Singh, the father of the deceased Trilok, has filed a petition in the Judicial Council, demanding that justice should be investigated and action taken against the two judges Tharu and Maharjan who gave the verdict. Investigating controversial judges is also a strong undertaking to maintain confidence in the judiciary. For that, it is appropriate for the Chairman of the Judicial Council, Chief Justice Prakashman Singh Raut to call a meeting and proceed with the investigation process. It is not natural for the Justice Council to remain absolutist from the decision which is being disputed in public.