Pokhara, 6 June — Nepal’s political landscape has been shaken after the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) filed a 632-page corruption case at the Special Court in Babarmahal against 93 individuals, including former Prime Minister Madhav Kumar Nepal. The charges stem from the controversial Patanjali land acquisition scandal, which allegedly involved the illegal purchase and sale of land across multiple districts in Nepal.
The CIAA has accused Nepal of misusing his authority as Prime Minister by enabling Patanjali Ayurved Nepal Pvt. Ltd., backed by Indian yoga guru Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, to purchase and later sell land in excess of the legal ceiling. Though Nepal has denied any wrongdoing and claimed political vendetta by incumbent Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli, the charges mark the first time a sitting or former Nepali prime minister has been implicated in such a corruption case related to a Cabinet decision.
The case revolves around decisions made during Nepal’s premiership in 2066 B.S., when his Cabinet granted Patanjali permission to acquire 815 ropanis of land in Kavrepalanchok—well above legal limits—and later allowed its sale, which is prohibited under Nepal’s land laws. Critics argue that the CIAA has exceeded its jurisdiction by prosecuting a Cabinet decision, as no legislation currently grants the agency authority to investigate such matters. Legal experts suggest this may provide technical grounds for Nepal’s defense in court.
Despite this, the scandal reveals a broader pattern of collusion between political figures and corporate interests. Patanjali, which was registered under suspiciously expedited procedures in 2064 B.S., managed to acquire large plots of land in various districts, including Dang, Lamjung, Syangja, Chitwan, Dhanusha, and Kathmandu. The company’s alleged use of government machinery and influence to sideline dissenting bureaucrats and push through unlawful transactions has raised serious questions about governance and institutional integrity.
Notably, while Nepali nationals have been charged, CIAA has refrained from indicting Indian nationals Ramdev and Balkrishna, despite their listed roles as the company’s patron and chairman, respectively. This selective approach has drawn criticism, especially in light of past instances where foreign nationals have faced prosecution in Nepal.
The case highlights troubling gaps in Nepal’s legal system and demonstrates how powerful political and business interests can manipulate state mechanisms for personal gain. It also raises significant questions about the accountability of executive decisions and the extent of CIAA’s mandate.
