Kathmandu, September 17

The Supreme Court today upheld the conviction of Sadbhawana Party Constituent Assembly member Sanjay Sah, who is facing a murder trial, in two criminal cases -- arms and ammunition case and public offence case.

The SC endorsed the verdict of Janakpur Appellate Court. The cases were filed against Sah 12 years ago in Dhanusha.

District Administration Office Dhanusha had slapped a jail sentence of one year and nine months and a fine of Rs 5,000 on Sah on July 14, 2004, in the arms and ammunition case and a fine or Rs 75,000 in the public offence case. Both verdicts were endorsed by the Appellate Court.

When Sah moved the SC against the Appellate Court verdict, SC Justices Awadhesh Kumar Yadav and Kamal Narayan Das had their opinion divided. So the case was transferred to the full bench, which endorsed the Appellate Court verdict today.

A case under Arms and Ammunition Act was filed against Sah after a pistol and a khukuri were found in his possession on May 17, 2003.

Sah is in judicial custody in connection with the Janakpur blast that killed five people and his CA membership remains suspended due to his indictment in the blast case. Asked if his conviction in the arms and ammunition and public offence cases would be a reason for the CA/Parliament to remove him from the apex body, Speaker Subas Chandra Nembang replied in the negative. He said there was no law that defines conviction in arms and ammunition case and public offence as grounds for removal of an MP from Parliament.

Nembang said only cases of moral turpitude could become a reason for removal of an MP. He said the CA revoked Jay Prakash Prasad Gupta’s status as an MP after he was convicted in a corruption case, which is a case of moral turpitude.

Advocate Surendra Kumar Mahto said in a case filed by Jungi Lal Ray Yadav against former CA member Khobhari Ray, who was convicted in an arms and ammunition case, the constitutional bench of the SC had delivered verdict stating that Khobhari’s conviction in arms and ammunition case would not become a reason for the revocation of his status of a parliamentarian or CA member.