Kathmandu — A complaint has been submitted to Nepal’s Judicial Council alleging that Supreme Court Justice Sunil Kumar Pokharel violated the judicial code of conduct while hearing a case related to Rabi Lamichhane.
The issue emerged during a hearing on a money laundering case involving Lamichhane. Since Sunday, arguments had been underway before a joint bench of Justices Sharanga Subedi and Sunil Kumar Pokharel regarding a request to amend and withdraw the case.
During the hearing, senior advocates argued that Justice Pokharel should not preside over the case because he had previously served as Lamichhane’s legal counsel when he was practicing law. They said that under judicial ethics rules, a judge who previously acted as a lawyer in a related matter should refrain from hearing the case.
Complaint Submitted to Judicial Council
Following the controversy, Yubaraj Safal filed a complaint with the Judicial Council on Monday, alleging that Justice Pokharel violated the Judicial Code of Conduct 2017.
The complaint refers to Section 4, Sub-section 4.5 (a), (b), and (c) of the code, which outlines situations in which a judge must refrain from hearing a case. According to the provisions, a judge should not preside over a case if they have a specific interest or bias toward any party, have prior personal knowledge of evidence related to the dispute, or have previously worked on the matter as a lawyer or appeared as a witness.
Safal said Justice Pokharel’s involvement in Lamichhane’s case raises concerns about impartiality. In the complaint, he requested the Judicial Council to intervene immediately and halt the hearing and all related proceedings scheduled for Chaitra 2.
Judicial Council Says Complaint Not Registered
The complaint, however, has not been formally registered by the Judicial Council. According to Council Secretary Jitendra Babu Thapaliya, complaints against Supreme Court justices do not fall within the council’s jurisdiction.
“We have received the application, but complaints against Supreme Court justices are not within our jurisdiction,” Thapaliya said. “Therefore, it has not been registered.”
