Lok Man Singh Karki, who currently remains suspended as the chief of the Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA), on Tuesday appeared before the Supreme Court (SC) in person to defend the charge that he had obstructed judicial proceedings.

Responding to a petition filed by Advocate Om Prakash Aryal, the apex court on November 8 had asked Karki and three of his aides to appear before court in person to furnish clarifications within a week.

Karki in his written clarification submitted to the SC has said the charge levelled against him “was derived out of ill-intention of the petitioner”.

While responding to Aryal’s earlier writ in which the petitioner has challenged Karki’s appointment as the chief of the CIAA, the apex court had decided to review its earlier verdict and summon Karki.

When an apex court team had reached Karki’s house in Naya Baneshwor, a group of locals comprising Karki’s aides had obstructed the officials in course of their duty.

Aryal had then moved the court against Karki and his aides for obstructing judicial proceedings.

Karki in his clarification to the SC has argued that the petitioner identifying him as a former chief secretary and giving his “old address” was a premeditated move against him. He has also urged the court to take into consideration the petitioner’s “intention” behind wrongly mentioning his official position and address.

Stating that his appointment as the CIAA chief on the recommendation of the Constitutional Council on May 8, 2013 is known to all, Karki has said in his clarification that he “has been living in the government quarters on the CIAA premises since then” and that the petitioner had mentioned the old address “with ill-intention”.

Karki has also argued that the petitioner “relied on media reports without any evidence that there was any obstruction in delivery of court summons” and maintained that he never created hurdles to the process of notice delivery in other cases.

But according to petitioner Aryal, when the first case against Karki was filed, the then government led by Khil Raj Regmi was yet to endorse Constitutional Council’s decision of nominating him as the CIAA chief.

A high level political mechanism on March 20, 2013 had decided to recommend Karki as the CIAA chief.

Three days later, Aryal had moved the SC challenging the decision.

Since Karki was yet to be appointed as the CIAA chief, the post of chief secretary which Karki held before 2006 people’s movement and his home address of Naya Baneshwor were mentioned in the petition, according to the petitioner.

While charging Karki with contempt of court for obstructing judicial proceedings, Aryal had made Karki’s aides Prabal Thapa, Pramod Karki Nakul Raj Gautam defendants.

“Karki and Gautam submitted their clarifications today,” said Bishwaraj Poudel, joint spokesperson for the SC. “After submitting the document, Karki also received the court notice for hearing date on his other cases.”

According to Poudel, Karki has also requested the court for allowing him to send a legal representative during the hearing of the main case—his appointment as the chief of the constitutional anti-graft body.

In his petition challenging Karki’s appointment, petitioner Aryal has claimed: “the entire appointment process is unlawful as Karki’s tenure in government service falls short of what has been provisioned in the constitution and he does not hold high moral character to lead the anti-graft body as enshrined in the constitution”.

What’s the case

 -    Oct 17: Court officials reach Lok Man Singh Karki’s house in Naya Baneshwor to deliver a summons but a group of locals obstructs them in carrying out their duty

 -    Nov 3: Advocate Om Prakash Aryal, who has challenged Karki’s appointment as the CIAA chief in the apex court, files a case against Karki and his aides, accusing them of abusing authority to obstruct judicial proceedings

 -    Nov: The Supreme Court orders Karki and defendants to appear before court within a week and furnish clarification as to why they should not be punished

Defendant argues

 -    His appointment as the CIAA chief on the recommendation of the Constitutional Council on May 8, 2013 is known to all. He has been living in the government quarters on the CIAA premises since then. The petitioner mentioned the old            address ‘with ill-intention’

 -    The petitioner relied on media reports without any evidence that there was any obstruction in delivery of court summons

 -    Never created hurdles to the process of notice delivery in other cases