Socio-Economic Crime: Arjun Lamsal alias Dinesh Aale vs. GON, NKP (6th semester)

Socio-Economic Crime: Arjun Lamsal alias Dinesh Aale vs. GON, NKP2078 B.S, Vol. 4, D.N. 10668.

Case: Counterfeit Currency and Organized Crime
Plaintiff/Applicant:Government of Nepal
Defendant/Respondent:Arjun Lamsal and Others
Decision Number:10668

This case involves the offence of dealing with counterfeit Indian currency and whether the act of the accused was an organized crime.

Facts of the Case:
Masud Alam and Arjun Lamsal alias Dinesh Ale were arrested at Room No. 104 of Potala Guest House, Kathmandu on 2070/10/10 B.S. The seized currency was comprised of 3,500 fake Indian currency notes of Rs35,00,000. It is 1,000 denomination and has a total face value of Indian Rs. 35,00,000/- The forensics examination revealed that the Indian currency notes seized were fake. In the investigation, evidence, such as the statements of the accused, seizure records, witness statements and telephone call records revealed links between Masud Alam, Dinesh Ale and Yunus Ansari. During investigation, Dinesh Ale said he went to the guest house to receive the fake Indian currency which Masud Alam had brought and the money was to be distributed to Yunus Ansari via Sohail Khan. The accused had been charged under Section 8 of Counterfeit Currency Chapter of Muluki Ain and Organized Crime (Prevention) Ordinance, 2069.

Legal Issues:

1. Whether Arjun Lamsal alias Dinesh Ale was guilty under Section 8 of the Counterfeit Currency Chapter of the Muluki Ain for his involvement in bringing and receiving counterfeit foreign currency in Nepal?
2. Whether the act of accused was organized crime under Organized Crime (Prevention) Ordinance, 2069?
3. Whether individuals with different roles in an organized crime can be held liable for organized crime?
4. What punishment should be given to the accused if he is guilty of organized crime?

Decision of courts:
Kathmandu District Court: Court found Masud Alam, Arjun Lamsal alias Dinesh Ale, Yunus Ansari and Sohail Khan guilty of committing counterfeit currency offence under Section 8 of the Muluki Ain’s Counterfeit Currency Chapter. The court did not believe the charge under Organized Crime (Prevention) Ordinance, 2069 established. Sumeshwar Prasad Kushwaha was acquitted as his involvement could not be proved. The case against Parmeshwar Mahato, who was absconding, was kept pending.

Patan Appellate court: The Court made some changes in the decision of the District Court. The court Found not guilty of the counterfeit-currency charge to Sohail Khan; Sustained the conviction of Masud Alam, Arjun Lamsal alias Dinesh Ale and Yunus Ansari

Supreme Court: The appeals of Dinesh Ale and the Government of Nepal were heard by the Supreme Court. Regarding Dinesh Ale the Supreme Court has denied Dinesh Ale’s appeal and his conviction by the Appellate Court was therefore upheld. Regarding Organized Crime the Supreme Court ruled that organized crime was sufficiently established. The Court noted that organized crime can be a multi-faceted affair with various individuals playing different roles.
The Court found that: Three or more people were involved, The fake money had been smuggled from Pakistan as per a plan, The accused had been in contact with each other; Each accused person had a different role to play and the evidence proved that the counterfeit Indian currency was being used in an organised manner. The Court thus found that the activities were organized crime under the Organized Crime (Prevention) Ordinance, 2069.
The Supreme Court partly reversed the decision of the Patan Appellate Court. It found Masud Alam, Arjun Lamsal (also known as Dinesh Ale) and Yunus Ansari guilty of organized crime. An extra punishment was imposed under Section 10(a) of Organized Crime (Prevention) Ordinance, 2069.

Established principles:

1. In organized crime, various people can have various roles.
2. Not everyone involved in an organized crime has to commit the same crime. Multiple people may carry out various roles within the same crime scheme.
3. The court should look at the overall plan, network, communication and roles of the persons involved, rather than look at each person’s act in isolation.
4. A person is liable to counterfeit foreign currency even if the currency has not been circulated.
5. Just being around other accused persons isn’t enough. The evidence should prove the role of that person in the crime.
6. Planning and execution of an organized crime can occur in various countries and with various individuals taking various roles at various stages.