KATHMANDU, Sept 28: It was around 10 pm on Saturday when an unexpected directive put the Kathmandu Valley Crime Investigation Office (KVCIO) on high alert: take former Chief Justice Cholendra Shumsher Rana into custody.
The instruction, according to police sources, came from the Prime Minister’s Secretariat through Home Affairs Minister Sudan Gurung. As Saturday was a public holiday, only personnel needed for emergencies were on duty at the office, which normally handles investigations into serious crimes in the Kathmandu Valley.
But there was an immediate problem. There was no complaint against Rana, nor had his family sought police assistance.
Police sources said the instruction was to take Rana to a safe place citing a “security threat.” The police have not, however, publicly explained the nature of the threat. They claimed that a plan to attack Rana that night had been discussed on Discord.
That explanation has raised a basic question: if Rana was facing a security threat, why was he taken to a crime investigation office rather than provided additional security at his residence?
According to sources, the answer may lie in the government’s growing concern over Rana’s political activities and his alleged involvement in sensitive legal matters.
Sources at the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) said the prime minister was not satisfied with some of Rana’s recent activities. They said the office had received information that Rana had become politically active, particularly after the appointment of Manoj Kumar Sharma as chief justice.
Rana was also reportedly meeting CPN-UML Chairman KP Sharma Oli. Sources said he was also in contact with former NC former President Sher Bahadur Deuba, who had been seeking the restoration of Parliament.
According to a source at the PMO, Deuba met Rana after returning from Hong Kong.
“Deuba and Oli were reportedly trying to advance the case for restoring Parliament through the court with Rana’s support, while Deuba’s claim that he would get justice from the court immediately after returning from Hong Kong in the Nepali Congress dispute made the Prime Minister’s Office more cautious,” the source said.
The source said the National Investigation Department (NID) had been instructed to keep a regular watch on the activities of Deuba, Oli and Rana, with Kumar Byanjankar (Ben), the prime minister’s chief adviser, receiving regular updates.
The government’s concerns, according to security sources, were not limited to politics.
Rana was also allegedly taking an interest in the case of controversial businessman Deepak Bhatta, who is in custody pending trial in a money-laundering case involving Rs 26 billion.
Former RPP Chair Rana urges govt to immediately release party l...
Bhatta, who was arrested in July, had previously been described as close to Rana. Sources said he had sought Rana’s help to secure his release and facilitate other legal matters.
A security source claimed that information about Rana’s efforts to help Bhatta’s case had reached the Prime Minister’s Secretariat.
Bhatta was arrested on the prime minister’s instructions. He had been accused of maintaining close ties with former leaders, including Oli and Deuba, and the prime minister is reportedly taking a serious interest in the case.
When Gurung first became home minister, he reportedly did not know that Bhatta had been arrested. He learned about the arrest only after Bhatta was taken into custody on the PMO's instructions.
Gurung later resigned as home minister after being dragged into controversy over allegations that he had acquired shares in Bhatta’s company. He returned to the ministry after a government-formed investigation committee cleared him.
According to NID sources, the Prime Minister’s Secretariat had been collecting information on these developments. The sources said the secretariat had a direct interest in Rana’s detention, believing that his activities concerning political issues and Bhatta’s case were becoming unhelpful to the government.
Rana was taken away on the day the prime minister returned
Until Saturday, police had received no indication that Rana would be taken into custody.
Prime Minister Balendra Shah (Balen) returned to Nepal that afternoon after attending the United Nations General Assembly. According to sources, his chief adviser Ben called Home Minister Gurung in the evening and sought information about Rana.
“It is being said that the home minister had already been instructed before Prime Minister Shah left for the United Nations General Assembly. Otherwise, why would the home minister call the police on Saturday and order Rana’s immediate arrest?” a security source said.
Following the pressure from the Prime Minister’s Secretariat, Gurung summoned Inspector General of Police Dan Bahadur Karki and senior security officials to his residence at around 8 pm.
According to a source close to the Home Minister, Karki told Gurung that it would be difficult to arrest a former chief justice when there was no case against him.
The meeting lasted around two hours. Gurung reportedly tried to persuade the Prime Minister’s Secretariat to reconsider the decision, but sources said he was unable to withstand the pressure.
The plan that emerged was to take Rana to the KVCIO on security grounds and release him the following day.
Around 11 pm, a police team reached Rana’s residence. Police contacted him through his personal security officer before taking him to the office.
Rana arrived at the Crime Investigation Office at around midnight.
According to sources, he spent his time there drinking tea and showed little interest in what the police were doing.
Police, however, have insisted that they did not arrest Rana.
SSP Santosh Khadka, chief of the KVCIO, said Rana was brought there solely for his protection.
“We did not arrest him. We received information that he was about to be attacked at his residence, so we brought him to a safe place. There was no other reason,” Khadka said. “We have now handed him over to his family and arranged security at his residence.”
Constitutional expert Bipin Adhikari, however, questions that explanation.
He said that if Rana was genuinely facing a security threat, the authorities could have increased security at his residence, coordinated with his family or warned them.
“If there was a security threat, additional security personnel could have been deployed, the family could have been consulted, and they could have been informed in advance to remain alert,” Adhikari said.
“Sending plainclothes police to a residence in the middle of the night, taking someone to a police office and returning him a day later does not provide a strong basis for saying that this was done because of a security threat.”
Adhikari said that even if there had been a case against Rana, the government could have simply asked a former chief justice to cooperate. Instead, he said, using the police to take him to a police office could create psychological pressure on other judges.
‘Taking him into custody was non-judicial’
The midnight removal of Rana has drawn strong criticism from political leaders, lawyers and civil society representatives.
They have questioned the legal basis for taking a former chief justice from his home without an arrest warrant, a complaint, or a clearly stated legal reason, describing the action as an interference with the rule of law and individual liberty.
Leaders of the NC, UML, Pragatisheel Loktantrik Party and other political parties have also objected to the move.
They have argued that even if Rana faced a security threat, taking him away from his home in the middle of the night was inconsistent with legal procedure.
Senior advocates and legal experts affiliated with the Nepal Bar Association and elsewhere have also criticized the incident.
Civil society representatives, intellectuals, media professionals and analysts have questioned why police have not clearly explained the legal basis and official reason for taking Rana to the police office. They have warned that the use of state power in such circumstances could weaken democratic values.
Rana himself had been at the center of controversy during his tenure as chief justice. Demands for investigations into alleged irregularities involving him had been raised at various times.
An impeachment motion against Rana was registered on February 13, 2022, with the signatures of 98 lawmakers from the NC, the then CPN (Maoist Centre) and CPN (Unified Socialist). The 21-point motion included allegations that he had amassed disproportionate wealth through corruption and shared positions with political parties in appointments to constitutional bodies.
After the House of Representatives’ term ended, then Parliament Secretary-General Bharat Raj Gautam issued Rana a letter stating that the impeachment motion had become inactive. A writ petition was subsequently filed at the Supreme Court challenging the decision.
A Constitutional Bench led by Chief Justice Manoj Kumar Sharma dismissed the writ petitions on September 9, 2026, clearing the way for Rana to receive his withheld pension and other benefits.
According to sources, the allegations raised in the impeachment motion may also have been investigated.
-1788334701.webp)
