KATHMANDU, June 26: Former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal appeared before the Special Court on Wednesday in connection with the Patanjali land scam filed by the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA). The court recorded his statement and concluded the detention debate on the same day.
A bench comprising Justices Tej Narayan Singh Rai, Ram Bahadur Thapa, and Bidur Koirala heard Nepal’s statement and conducted the bail hearing.
Senior advocate Sushil Pant argued on behalf of the CIAA, claiming the decision related to the Patanjali land issue was not a policy-level decision. He demanded that Nepal be kept in custody while the case proceeds.
In response, senior advocate Shambhu Thapa, representing former PM Nepal, objected to the CIAA’s argument. He compared the case to the Giribandhu land case involving Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, arguing that similar decisions were taken during Oli’s previous tenure, suggesting the charges against Nepal were baseless.
Mahesh Bhatt's 'Sadak 2' gets a new release date
Another senior advocate, Govinda Bandi, also defending Nepal, claimed the Patanjali land proposal was policy-related and such proposals are handled by the cabinet’s bill committee.
Most lawyers defending Nepal argued that cabinet decisions are policy matters, and hence, a sitting or former prime minister should not face prosecution. They requested that Nepal be released on general court appearance conditions and present himself when required.
However, the court neither detained Nepal nor released him on a general date. Instead, it ordered his release on a bail of Rs 3.5 million, citing Clause 7 (d) of the Special Court Act, 2059 BS.
Clause 7 of the Act defines the court's authority, and subsection (d) allows bail based on the damage caused or illegal benefits gained and the possible punishment, if immediate detention is not deemed necessary based on current evidence.
The court left the question of whether Nepal’s cabinet decision should be considered a policy decision unresolved. The order stated, “... whether the decisions made by the cabinet chaired by the then Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal fall within the definition of purely policy-level decisions shall be determined during the final verdict.”
The court also stated, “... based on Nepal’s statement to the CIAA and this court, the complaint, the cabinet’s decision under his leadership, and current evidence — including statements by Trilochan Upreti and Minendra Larija — it is seen that the company purchased land exceeding the limit granted for a specific purpose, but used it for selling plots instead. Hence, under Clause 7 (d) of the Special Court Act, 2059, the condition for bail has been met.”
Following the court’s order, Nepal submitted a bank guarantee for the bail amount on Wednesday night and returned home.
