What is the Current Status of the Investigation Against UML Secretary Mahesh Basnet?
March 31, Kathmandu – The Patan High Court has dismissed a writ petition filed by a young woman demanding the advancement of a supplementary complaint against UML Secretary Mahesh Basnet. The woman had filed a complaint at the District Police Office about allegations involving Basnet in cases of feticide, rape, and robbery, calling for investigation progress. When the complaint did not move forward, she petitioned the Patan High Court. However, the bench of Justices Somkant Mainali and Keshav Prasad Adhikari rejected the writ, noting that legal proceedings were already underway.
The order states, “Following the order issued by the Kathmandu District Court on March 30, 2026 BS (April 13, 2020), the legal process appears to be in progress; therefore, there is no need to issue a mandamus as requested by the petitioner.” The writ petition was consequently dismissed.
With the order made public, UML leader Mahesh Basnet claimed that the ordeal imposed on him by the young woman over the past three years had come to an end. He asserted that all related complaints have been dismissed, and attempts to file supplementary complaints have failed following the High Court’s decision. Nevertheless, the High Court declined the petition, citing the ongoing legal process. On Tuesday, the District Court refused permission to arrest Basnet, stating that an arrest could only proceed after receiving the certified copies of the order from the Patan High Court. Subsequently, the High Court ruled that since the legal proceedings had already begun, no mandamus was required, thus dismissing the petition.
The young woman, identified as residing in 26 Parisar 58, had previously filed a written complaint which the police refused to register, prompting her to send it via postal service to the District Public Prosecutor’s Office. When the investigation did not advance, the Public Prosecutor decided not to pursue the case. The writ petition filed against this decision was dismissed by the Patan High Court. She later submitted an additional supplementary complaint. Observing no progress following her complaints, her second writ petition was under consideration at the Patan High Court, which also requested all related files from the Public Prosecutor’s Office during hearings.
After the second complaint, the District Police Office, Kathmandu, sought permission from the Kathmandu District Court to arrest Mahesh Basnet. The court expressed that it would grant arrest permission only after reviewing the previous case files. The order from the District Court two days prior mentioned, “The file is currently with the High Court, and there is no change in its registration details. Since this matter is under consideration by the High Court, issuing further orders from this court would be contrary to judicial norms and legal procedures.” The District Court emphasized that decisions would be made only upon receipt of authenticated copies from the High Court.
The order further states, “Under the current circumstances, arrest permission cannot be granted as requested.” Following the Wednesday order from the Patan High Court, UML leader Basnet declared that all investigations against him have been completed. The District Court indicated it would finalize remaining matters after the High Court’s directives. The High Court’s dismissal was based on the fact that investigations were ongoing, making a mandamus unnecessary. This situation has raised questions about the investigation’s next steps. A government prosecutor commented on the apparent confusion between the instructions of the District and High Courts: “Once the High Court concludes the matter, the file will be submitted to the District Court, which will then make decisions accordingly. We will submit the files asserting that the investigation is ongoing, and the District Court will decide on further action based on that.”