Resham Chaudhary & Supreme Court Decision

The complete verdict of the Supreme Court's judgment regarding Resham Chaudhary's case prompts an inquiry into its governmental implications. The court's stance on commuting Chaudhary's sentence and its evaluation of political maneuvering raises pertinent questions.

Resham Chaudhary: What is the meaning of the full text of the Supreme Court decision?

What is the message given to the government by the full text of the verdict of the Supreme Court in the case of Resham Chaudhary, who received amnesty?

August 19th, Kathmandu

After the full text of the Supreme Court‘s final verdict in the Tikapur case was published, questions have been raised about the government’s decision to vacate the sentence of former MP Reshlamal Chaudhary, who was found guilty in the case.

Chowdhury, who was arrested long after the incident in which eight security personnel and one minor were killed in the attack of Tharuhat protesters in August 2072, was sentenced to prison and received amnesty from the President last May.

The full text of the Supreme Court verdict on the Tikapur case, published two months after he was released from jail, termed the attempt to commute his sentence as “political bargaining”.

The main points covered in the full text of the court’s judgment are:

  • The politicization of crime attempts to give political color to even heinous criminal offenses prohibited by the current criminal law and to provide immunity from criminal liability to criminals who can gain access to state power. This increases the tendency to commit crimes under the guise of politics.
  • If the blood-stained hands get political protection, the person who has committed the criminal act prohibited by the country’s criminal law will wander in the careless society with a loud voice.
  • When someone is prosecuted and punished for a single crime, and someone is exempted, the saying “law for the big, law for the small” prevalent in the society makes sense. Criminal justice dies when criminals are exempted from liability created by criminal offenses under the guise of politics.
  • Withdrawal of the cases under the strategy of political bargaining or giving pardons in violation of the established values ​​and legal system seems to be contrary to the valid principles of the constitution, laws and justice of the country.

Resham Lal Choudhary, who is also the leader of the Civil Liberation Party, filed an appeal in the Supreme Court against the decision of the High Court Dipayal.

In the full text of the final judgment of the Supreme Court, the sentence of life imprisonment against Reshammalal Chaudhary has been upheld.

What does the verdict mean?

A former judge of the Supreme Court, Balaram KC, says that the amnesty granted by the government to Reshammalal Choudhary will not be reversed based on the latest court verdict.

But he thinks that the court can speak about it in the case of Sarada Kadayat, the wife of one of the police officers who was killed in the Tikapur incident.

Challenging the government’s decision to pardon Chaudhary, a case filed by the court is pending in the Supreme Court.

“The court decided but if it is innocent, it will be pardoned. We had a vagrant. A bit powerful after the leader felt that the man would have been forgiven,” Casey told the BBC.

“It has given a message that the government should not be left behind, should not grant amnesties and should not be punished according to the crime and should not be released if there is hard evidence.”

“It is a practice of withdrawing the issue of pardon for the vote bank. This is a good strike against that. If we are to have a government that operates under the rule of law, that should be the norm,” says Casey.

This is a good strike against the practice of withdrawing the amnesty issue for the vote bank. If our government is to be governed by the rule of law, it must be considered as a standard

“Whoever pardons the one who can bring 138 (majority) in the parliament, will the others stay in jail?” He has a question.

Former judge KC thinks that it will be difficult to grant amnesty except in cases where the case is being prosecuted only because of political revenge rather than evidence.

But he said that the pardon given to Chaudhary by the President will not change based on this decision.

“Forgiveness is the last thing. Even the Supreme Court will not reconsider the issue of pardon. The law and the constitution are silent on this,” he said.

He says that the government should apologize after the full text of the verdict was questioned.

“Now if the government is stubborn, we have misused our rights in the name of democracy and democracy by issuing a public statement. It is clear from the full text that we were in a hurry… Not only the government but also the Congress-UML should apologize so that such an incident does not happen again from us,” says KC.

After the Supreme Court’s verdict, a post made on Facebook in the name of Resham Chaudhary has demanded the publication of the Red Commission report.

A commission led by former Supreme Court judge Girish Chandra Lal investigated the agitations in Terai Madhesh and Tharuhat.

“If the report is not published now, we will be forced to do all kinds of protests in the streets, houses, and government. I don’t mean that I have to speak about everything, everything inside confirms the behavior towards us. We have tolerated everything, but how long will we tolerate it?”

“It is never good to try to separate us by infiltrating our pure politics and again using our own people,” Chowdhury’s post on Nam on Facebook has also been published in various media.

Why was the pardon granted to Resham Chaudhary?

A statement issued by the President’s office when granting amnesty to Resham Chaudhary said, “Amnesty has been granted in accordance with Article 276 of the Constitution and Article 159 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 2074 on the occasion of Republic Day, 2080.”

Conveyance of court decisions

The Supreme Court upheld the decision made by the District and High Courts in the case of former parliamentarian Reshlamal Chaudhary, who was convicted in the Tikapur incident and is serving life imprisonment. Its full text was published on Wednesday.

11 people, including Resham Chaudhary, were found guilty by District Court Kailali and High Court Dipayal on charges of being the main planners in the incident that took place in August 2072.

On February 22, 2075, the Kailali District Court sentenced seven people including Resham Chaudhary to life imprisonment.

Then on 2nd January 2077, Dipayal High Court also sentenced seven people including Resham Chaudhary to life imprisonment.

In the previous House of Representatives, Resham Chaudhary was elected from Kailali Region No. 1.

He participated in the election and won while the police were searching for his involvement in the Kailali incident.

A few days after Chaudhary was sworn in as an MP, the Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s order to keep him in custody pending trial.

Tikapur Incident: What happened?

When the Tharuhat movement intensified, the protest in Kailali turned violent and the crowd attacked and killed eight security personnel including Senior Superintendent of Police Laxman Neupane of Nepal Police.

A child also died in that incident.

The High Court had previously declared that the “Tikapur incident was cruel, cruel and anti-human”.

More than two dozen people involved in the incident were charged with duty killing, robbery and murder.

Who is Resham Chaudhary?

Resham Chaudhary used to run an FM station and resort in Kailali when the Tharuhat movement was raging. He went underground for some time after his name was mentioned in the Tikapur scandal.

Chaudhary, who was accused of being the main planner in the incident, was later arrested and kept in jail pending trial.

In the previous parliamentary elections, he was a candidate from Rashtriya Janata Party.

After being elected MP, he was sworn in from prison.

In the elections held last November, he became a candidate for the House of Representatives from Bardia-2 from the newly formed Civil Liberation Party.

Chowdhury’s candidature was cancelled as he was jailed for a criminal offence. But the party presented his father who was an independent candidate in the same constituency as its candidate and he won.

While in jail, Chaudhary founded the Civil Liberation Party.

The Civil Liberation Party, which participated in the elections for the first time, won four seats in the federal parliament, while on the provincial side, it won seven seats in Far West, four seats in Lumbini and one seat in Madhesh.

Ranjita Shrestha, the president of the said party and Chaudhary’s wife, is the Minister of Land Management, Cooperatives and Poverty Alleviation in the Prachanda-led government.