Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli said on Thursday that he has not committed contempt of court as accused by petitioners in a case.

Oli on Thursday appeared before the Supreme Court, in person, to furnish his reply concerning the contempt of court petition filed against him on January 26.

The petitioners—senior advocate Kumar Sharma Acharya and advocate Kanchan Krishna—had argued that Oli made disparaging remarks against 94-year-old senior advocate Krishna Prasad Bhandari, and called the ongoing hearing on the House dissolution case a “drama.”

In his response, the prime minister claimed that the contempt of court allegation was made against him with a malafide intention by taking some of his statements made at his party programme out of context.

“I have never taken the name of any law practitioner, nor have I obstructed the judicial process or anyone from participating in any hearing,” Oli said in his written reply. “I have always used respectful language. The case against me is purposeless. The claim that I committed contempt of court is unjustified and deserves quashing.”

Though Oli claimed that his statements were taken out of context and presented before the court after spicing them up, he stopped short of shedding light on what he had exactly said.

While addressing a gathering of cadres of his faction of the Nepal Communist Party on January 22, Oli, alluding to the 94-year-old advocate, said that the petitioners troubled a “grandpa lawyer” by dragging him to the court. He also said that those arguing on behalf of the petitioners were repeating the same arguments ad nauseum while dubbing the hearing “a drama”.

As many as 13 writ petitions against Oli’s December 15 move of dissolving the House of Representatives have been filed at the Supreme Court. The court was hearing the advocates plead on behalf of the petitioners when Oli made those statements for which the contempt of court petition was filed against him.

“I stand by the principle–not to fight against the truth and not to bow down to power,” Oli has said in his reply. “Whether I am in a position of power or not, I have always stood by the independence of the judiciary, and I will continue to do so in the future.”

Oli said that he has, for five decades, stood in favour of rule of law, the principle of separation of power, independence of the judiciary, human rights, and equitable society, and spent 14 years in jail fighting for the cause.

“I would like to make it clear before the honourable court that I have never indulged in any actions or made any statements that amount to contempt of court,” said Oli. “The contempt case against me is inappropriate and prejudiced.”

Oli’s reply to the court on contempt charges comes days after four former chief justices furnished their replies in a similar contempt case over their issuance of a statement calling the House dissolution move unconstitutional.

Contempt of court case has also been filed against Pushpa Kamal Dahal, former prime minister and chair of the other faction of the Nepal Communist Party.

Advocate Sameer Hayu filed a contempt of court case against Dahal on February 1, arguing that he had been making statements over the government decision to dissolve the House of Representatives, which is sub-judice.

The Supreme Court on February 3 asked Dahal to furnish a written reply.

Similarly, former Speaker Daman Nath Dhungana too faces a contempt case for making public statements warning that the Supreme Court’s justices could be targeted if they fail to consider people’s sentiment while delivering justice.