Rabi Lamichhane is released by the court on Rs 6 million bail in the Swarnalaxmi Cooperative fraud case

In relation to the Swarnalaxmi Cooperative fraud case, which is based in Kalimati, the Kathmandu District Court on Wednesday ordered the release of Rabi Lamichhane, the chairman of the Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), on a bond of Rs 6 million.

Following the pre-trial detention hearing, the order was given by a single bench of Judge Madhav Prasad Adhikari at the Kathmandu District Court. Lamichhane can now defend the case without being taken into detention thanks to this.

After spending 84 days in judicial custody for an investigation into his alleged involvement in the misappropriation of depositor savings from five cooperatives nationwide, former home minister Lamichhane was released on January 9 on a bail of Rs 6.5 million by the Kaski District Court. The next day, he was scheduled to appear in the Kathmandu District Court for the opening arguments of the Swarnalaxmi Cooperative fraud case.

However, three days after being freed by the Kaski District Court, he appeared in person at the Kathmandu District Court on Sunday after the court there ordered the police to hold him once more.

Senior Advocates Sushil Panta and Raman Shrestha began the court session on Wednesday at 11 a.m., arguing on Lamichhane’s behalf because the plaintiffs from the District Government Attorney’s Office (DGAO) had finished their arguments on Tuesday. He was also backed by the arguments of advocates Rajendra Prasad Sedhai and Suraj Basnet. Following their arguments, the plaintiffs’ representatives were Ganesh Kumar Sharma, an assistant attorney, Khadindra Raj Katwal, the district attorney, and Ramhari Sharma Kafle, the chief of the District Government Attorney’s Office (DGAO). On behalf of the victims, senior advocates Dinesh Tripathi and Surendra Bhandari made arguments. Lamichhane also spoke for around a minute about his opinions.

Citing articles 68 and 72 of the National Criminal Procedure (Code) Act, 2017, the single bench ordered the release on bail on Wednesday evening after the conclusion of arguments. While paragraph 72 establishes the basis for determining the amount of bail, bond, guarantee, or bank guarantee, clause 68 of the act gives the court the authority to request bail, bond, guarantee, or bank guarantee from the accused if there are reasonable grounds to support the allegation against them. Therefore, the application of article 68 implies that the court has not cleared Lamichhane of any involvement in the cooperative scheme.

Clause 72(2) of the act, however, also allows any party to a case to appeal, providing justification that the amount of bail, bond, guarantee, or bank guarantee required of any individual under the act is too small or excessive and therefore unreasonable. The appeal court is then empowered to change or modify the amount of such bail, bond, guarantee, or bank guarantee. Therefore, if the plaintiffs have good reason to appeal, the subclause has established grounds for a revision in the bail amount.