Kathmandu, January 11
The investigation report submitted by the Nepal Police in the much talked about Lalita Niwas case has been sent back by the District Public Prosecutor’s Office, Kathmandu, asking for ‘further investigation’, which has sparked discussion and debate in public circles.
The Central Investigation Bureau (CIB) of Nepal Police had submitted the investigation report on the case to the Public Prosecutor’s Office last Thursday.
However, the Public Prosecutor’s Office on Monday dismissed the report as incomplete.
Some in the public prosecutor’s office have accused the government prosecutor’s office of being ‘inaccessible’ in the land grab case.
But some legal experts who spoke to the BBC said the process was normal.
Statement of the public prosecutor
Ganga Prasad Poudel, chief co-counsel of the District Government Attorney’s Office, Kathmandu, said that the report was sent back with suggestions ”due to insufficient police investigation”.
”We have asked for further investigation and submission of a report,” he said.
However, the CIB has been saying that the report has been prepared after a long investigation and collection of many old documents on the issue of land grabbing.
In its report, the police had recommended that more than 300 people, including various former high-ranking officials, be named as defendants in the case.
Question of time limit
In the police report, it was recommended to the defendants to file a case as per Article 276 of the Civil Offenses (Code) Act, 2074 BS.
According to the article, a two-year time limit has been fixed for prosecuting such cases. The deadline is set to expire on Tuesday.
However, co-advocate Ganga Prasad Poudel said that the time limit of the country’s criminal code would not be attractive in the Lalita Niwas case.
Police investigation into Lalita Niwas land case is over, what happens now?
Case against 175 people including Vijay Gachchhadar and Deep Basnyat in Lalita Niwas
land case
”There were rumors that the deadline was about to expire, but the deadline has not expired as it is a matter of law and order,” he said.
According to him, the report has been sent back for further investigation as the action will be taken as per the Civil Code and there is no time limit in such matters.
He asserted that his confession had been obtained through torture and that his confession had been obtained through torture.
”As some of the Nepali laws have been replaced by the Amendment, Integration, Adjustment and Repeal Act, 2074 BS, there is a time limit for the implementation of the Civil Code and the issues that attract it,” he said.
He says that the provision in that regard has been made in Article 39 of the Civil Act
Amendment, Integration, Adjustment and Repeal of some Nepali laws.
‘According to the Criminal Code, there is a time limit’
However, former Attorney General Ramesh Badal argues that the provisions of the new Act will be applicable in the case of time limit.
He told the BBC: ”In my opinion, the deadline is two years. Because we have a principle of criminal law. What that principle is our principle of criminal law
”From a theoretical point of view, I think it should have gone within two years, and I think it should.”
He said that instead of submitting the report to the police at the end of the time limit, it was as if ”it should have been submitted sooner but it was not done”.
According to him, it is not a new practice for the public prosecutor’s office to send back the report to the police for further investigation.
‘Civil Act may take time’
Gauri Bahadur Karki, former chairperson of the special court, said that the issue was sent back to the police by the public prosecutor.
”As the case is being registered under the Criminal Code, it is the police’s prerogative to report only at the last minute in a case involving more than 300 defendants,” he said.
”Even the public prosecutor should have come before now and said that there is a time limit for the civil law.… Here, it seems that both parties have done this by collusion.”
”In a sense, everyone, including the political leaders, has tried to tackle the issue in collusion.”
However, he claimed that the case could still be prosecuted within the time limit of the Civil
Code.
CIB to ‘strategically file case’ against accused in Lalita Niwas case
Baburam Bhattarai ready to become Nilakantha if necessary, in Lalita Niwas land case
Giving an example of that, he said, ”The time limit of the law is the same for every other.”
”Even before the Prevention of Corruption Act 2059 came, various political office bearers and secretaries had filed lawsuits against us saying that the Prevention of Corruption Act 2017 was enacted and the case was filed out of time.”
”We were looking into the case after a special bench of the Supreme Court ruled that the 2059 Act was a continuation of the 2017 Corruption Act.”
But now he understands that both the police and the public prosecutor may be trying to
protect the people involved in the case.
What does the head of the investigation committee say?
Sharda Prasad Trital, the coordinator and former secretary of the investigation committee
formed by the government to investigate the Lalita Niwas case, thinks that the case may have been tried to make the case unresolved as ”even big political personalities are involved”.
He suspects that both the police and the public prosecutor’s office may have been involved.
Case against 175 people including Vijay Gachchhadar and Deep Basnyat in Lalita Niwas
land case
‘Land in the name of individuals from urban department to irrigation project’
He said that with the submission of the report by the police at the end of the two-year period and the return of the report by the government prosecutor’s office, many convicts could be acquitted.
However, he acknowledged that their numbers were not enough to defeat President Conte’s government.
”Even if the culprit is not prosecuted, people will look at both the public prosecutor and the CIB with suspicion as to the last resort,” he said.
What does CIB say?
Chief of the CIB, Deputy Inspector General of Police Dhiraj Pratap Singh said that another report would be submitted soon after conducting further investigation as per the instructions of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Speaking to the BBC, he said: ”We have received a report from the public prosecutor’s office asking us to investigate and submit further instructions.”
Chief of the CIB, Deputy Inspector General of Police Dhiraj Pratap Singh said that another report would be submitted soon after conducting further investigation as per the instructions of the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Speaking to the BBC, he said: ”We have received a report from the public prosecutor’s office asking us to investigate and submit further instructions.”
”It is up to the public prosecutor to make the final decision, but we have given the go-ahead for the proceedings under the current code, as we received the complaint two years ago after the code came into force.”
Now, it is understood that the Public Prosecutor’s Office has asked them to submit a report after conducting an investigation in accordance with the old law.
Apart from the CIB’s investigation into the Lalita Niwas case, a corruption case has also been filed by the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority.
A number of former high-ranking officials, including a former deputy prime minister, have been named as defendants in the case.
So far, three people involved in the incident have been arrested.
By Karuna Thapa
