Oct 29, Kathmandu - A middleman allegedly invoked connections to Nepal’s police, intelligence agencies and foreign embassies to influence Supreme Court judges, according to Justice Hari Prasad Phuyal. He says that when judges raised concerns with police officials, they were advised to “stay alert” rather than assured that the claims would be investigated.

Phuyal said intermediary Inam Sapkota initially spoke about an independent judiciary but later pressured judges over cases before the court, including one involving businessman Deepak Bhatta. “No Supreme Court judge has issued an order or verdict under his influence,” Phuyal said, adding that he was not involved in any wrongdoing and had been victimised by the intermediary’s alleged scheme. He called for an impartial investigation.

According to Phuyal, the court was facing an atmosphere of uncertainty at the time, amid discussions about appointing a chief justice and the possibility of impeachment proceedings against judges. He said Sapkota took advantage of that climate to approach judges.

Phuyal alleged that Sapkota claimed to represent an embassy of a friendly country, described himself as a medical doctor, and said he had links to foreign intelligence agencies. He also allegedly boasted of direct access to the prime minister’s office, the army chief and the inspector general of police, and suggested that judges would not face impeachment because of him.

After initially building trust, Sapkota allegedly began pressing judges about pending cases. In a habeas corpus case concerning Rohit Gupta of Himalayan Reinsurance, Phuyal said, Sapkota invoked the prime minister’s name while urging that Gupta remain in custody. A bench comprising Phuyal and Justice Shrikant Paudel instead ordered Gupta’s release on bail.

Phuyal said Sapkota later met judges at Hotel Himalaya and warned that the prime minister was unhappy and impeachment could follow. He said the encounter raised further suspicions when Sapkota reportedly asked that the bill be put under someone else’s name.

Concerned about Sapkota’s conduct, Phuyal said he contacted the police chief’s secretariat and showed officials Sapkota’s photograph and phone number. Two days later, he was reportedly told that Sapkota was a “high-profile” person with extensive connections, and that police themselves were keeping their distance and advising judges to be cautious.

Phuyal said judges were left confused after the police response, while the prime minister’s office informally indicated it had no connection with Sapkota. He also alleged that Sapkota later warned of a major uprising and a military coup, heightening fears among judges.

With no apparent action from police, Phuyal said six or seven judges consulted former and serving military leaders and shared information and evidence about the alleged pressure. He said Sapkota’s arrest became possible after the army took the matter seriously and helped coordinate a response.

Asked whether he would step aside from judicial duties until the investigation concludes, Phuyal said he had done nothing wrong and had no intention of leaving the bench. He called for a thorough investigation into how intermediaries attempt to exert influence over the courts, saying judges should defend judicial impartiality with confidence.

Phuyal also complained that news reports had misrepresented the circumstances, making him appear to be involved when, he said, judges’ own complaint led to Sapkota’s arrest. The allegations have raised concerns about the reach of intermediaries and the response of Nepal’s security institutions.