Kathmandu, October 29
Inam Sapkota, who was arrested on allegations of acting as a middleman, has been found to have invoked the names of senior government officials, including Prime Minister Balen Shah and Chief Justice Dr Manoj Sharma. He also allegedly attempted to influence a case pending before the Supreme Court by messaging Justice Hari Phuyal.
The Department of Money Laundering Investigation had sent Sapkota’s mobile phone to the Digital Forensics Lab at police headquarters for examination. The details subsequently provided to the department include messages requesting deposits into accounts associated with the names of officials from various constitutional bodies, as well as communications with a Supreme Court justice.
Diyo Post first reported details related to the chief justice, while Naya Patrika Daily first disclosed the communications involving Justice Phuyal.
3 names, 2 bank accounts
In one message, Sapkota addressed someone as “Good morning, ma’am” and asked the person to deposit money in the names of his relatives. He also shared bank account details for the purpose.
The people he asked to help collect the money were Nirajan Pandey, based in the United States, and Kabita Pandey, based in Nepal. According to a source associated with the department, Kabita is a member of Sapkota’s family, while Nirajan is a relative on his in-laws’ side.
The same page of the report sent by the lab to the department mentions Chief Justice Dr Manoj Sharma, Bishwaraj Pokharel (Okhaldhunga) and Banshi Dahal, identified as the IGP of the Armed Police Force Nepal.
Pokharel, a former AIG of Nepal Police, was elected to the House of Representatives from Okhaldhunga on a Rastriya Swatantra Party ticket in the last election. Dahal, an AIG of the Armed Police Force, was suspended by the government a few weeks ago and placed under investigation. He has since retired while under suspension.
The document lists amounts for three months: 58,333 for November, 70,000 for December and another 70,000 for January. The total is 198,333. Each of the three entries also lists 8,000 as tax. After deducting the tax amounts, the document gives a net figure of 174,333. It does not specify whether the amounts are in rupees or US dollars.
Deposits in Nepal or the United States?
The message provides two options for depositing the money. For a deposit in the United States, it instructs the recipient to deposit US$7,500 into a Bank of America account in the name of Nirajan Pandey. For a deposit in Nepal, it asks the recipient to deposit the equivalent of US$7,500 in Nepali currency into Kabita Pandey’s account at Sanima Bank.
Onlinekhabar sought responses from the three individuals whose names Sapkota had included in the message requesting a deposit. Despite repeated phone calls and messages, Chief Justice Dr Manoj Sharma did not respond.
RSP lawmaker Bishwaraj Pokharel said he did not know Sapkota and had no relationship with him. “What names such disgraced individuals have dragged into this is a separate matter,” Pokharel, a former AIG of Nepal Police, told Onlinekhabar. “I do not even know a person named Inam, let alone have any contact with him. Someone like me would never get involved with such people.”
Dahal, the recently retired AIG of the Armed Police Force, also declined to respond to Onlinekhabar.
Communications with a Supreme Court justice
Details of communications between Sapkota and Supreme Court Justice Hari Phuyal also became public on Thursday. According to information provided by the Department of Money Laundering Investigation, Sapkota initially sent a message to Phuyal asking him to ensure that Rohit Gupta remained in custody.
Claiming that the prime minister had taken a serious interest in the matter, Sapkota allegedly followed up with a message asking the judge to dismiss the case. Officials at Prime Minister Balen Shah’s secretariat declined to issue an official response. Informally, however, they maintained that such a thing was impossible.
“Even imagining that the prime minister would use a middleman to try to influence a judge and interfere in a case is unthinkable,” a member of the prime minister’s team said. In response to Sapkota’s message invoking the prime minister’s name, Justice Phuyal reportedly replied that there were grounds to release Rohit Gupta on bail and that he had set bail at Rs 20 million. The judge also wrote: “Let’s meet at Hotel Himalaya tomorrow at 7 pm.”
Justice Phuyal declined to respond to Onlinekhabar. According to a source associated with the department, Sapkota had been in regular contact with five or six other judges. He allegedly built relationships by claiming to be close to Prime Minister Balen Shah, the army chief, senior officials at the Army Headquarters and the US Embassy.
According to another Supreme Court justice, Sapkota had begun showing particular interest in cases involving financial matters. He reportedly claimed to have already met Chief Justice Sharma and other judges, and began pressuring them to issue favourable orders and verdicts in pending cases.
As Sapkota’s activities intensified, some judges summoned IGP Dan Bahadur Karki and asked him about Sapkota’s background. Karki reportedly told them that Sapkota was close to power centres, including the Prime Minister’s Office, and was an influential person, according to one of the judges.
After the police mechanism failed to provide satisfactory answers, some judges met Army Chief Ashok Raj Sigdel to inquire about Sapkota, the judge said. During the meeting, Sigdel reportedly told them that he had neither needed to deploy another person nor done so. He also assured them that he would relay the concerns to the Prime Minister’s Office.
A source at the Prime Minister’s Office said: “After information, including other surveillance details, also came from Army Headquarters, surveillance of Inam Sapkota was intensified. He was arrested after that.”
Fragmented information serves no one’s interests
Nepal Bar Association President Professor Dr Bijaya Mishra described the recent developments as evidence of a system vulnerable to manipulation by Sapkota, despite his attempts to exert influence. He said releasing information in instalments, rather than making the full details public, would not benefit anyone.
“There is a risk that the evidence could be used as a tactic by one interest group to attack another to serve its own interests,” Mishra said. “State investigations should not take this form. There does not appear to be good faith behind it.” He said the government must convince the public that its commitment to a corruption-free judiciary and administration is firm and unquestionable.
“Otherwise, leaks and fragmented information may heat up social media, but they will not bring reform,” he added. “Such practices increase the risk of behind-the-scenes compromises being made to serve vested interests.”
