KATHMANDU, JULY 28

The Supreme Court convicted Nepali Congress leader and former Home Minister Govinda Raj Joshi of graft and imposed a jail term of nine months and a fine of Rs 6.9 million rupees.

Related Articles

Special Committee is government's guide: Home Minister Lekhak

Home Minister Lekhak calls for coordination to improve prisons, child correction homes

A division bench of Justices Binod Sharma and Bal Krishna Dhakal delivered the verdict. The SC pronounced its verdict in the case almost 12 years after the case was filed at the top court.

The Special Court had convicted Joshi in the corruption case on 24 June 2012, and he had filed an appeal at the SC on 1 February 2013 challenging his conviction. According to SC Spokesperson Govinda Prasad Ghimire other defendants Tara Raj Pandey and Basudev Panta were acquitted in the case. The SC rejected the claims of Govinda Raj Joshi's son Dinesh Raj Joshi.

In the past, the SC justices have rescued themselves from the case on multiple occasions.

The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) had filed a corruption case against former Minister Joshi on 12 January, 2004, accusing him of amassing disproportionate asses of Rs 30.93 million between 1991 and 2001, when he held various ministerial portfolios, mostly in the cabinet led by Nepali Congress

In 2006, the Special Court had acquitted Joshi, citing lapse of statute of limitations, but it heard the case again after the Supreme Court ordered it to reopen the case. The

Special Court had on 26 July, 2012 convicted Joshi of corruption and imposed one and a half-year jail term and Rs 21.6 million fine. This time the apex court started hearing the case on May 14 and lawyers representing both sides finished their oral submissions on May 26. On June 2, the court reserved judgement for today.

Joshi's case hearing could not be conducted as the CIAA failed to send case files.

On June 6, 2019, A division bench of justice Ishwar Prasad Khatiwada and Sapana Pradhan Malla had issued a show cause notice to the CIAA secretary and other concerned officials for not submitting the case files to the court even after repeated reminders were served to them, in the past five years.

This case drew sharp criticism from civil society members and legal luminaries for not being decided for years.