Former Nepal Telecom MD Sunil Poudel Convicted of Illicit Wealth Accumulation, Sentenced to Jail and Fined

KATHMANDU. The Special Court has convicted former Nepal Telecom Managing Director Sunil Poudel of acquiring illegal property and sentenced him to jail and a fine.

The bench of Special Court Chairman Sudarshan Dev Bhatta and members Hemanta Rawal and Dilir Ratna Shrestha has sentenced Poudel to 2 years in prison, plus an additional 6 months for being a public servant, totaling 2 years and 6 months in prison. Furthermore, it has been decided that property worth 12 crore 75 lakh 70 thousand 237 rupees and 43 paisa, determined to have been illegally acquired by him, will be confiscated, and he will have to pay an additional fine equal to that amount. In addition, he will have to pay 51 lakh 2 thousand 809 rupees and 49 paisa as compensation fee as per the Crime Victim Protection Act.

Sunil Poudel's brother, Anil Poudel, was also made a defendant in this case. However, the court has ordered that the lands in Anil Poudel's name not be confiscated, as some of the properties in his name were found to have been acquired through loans and property division, and there was insufficient clear evidence that Sunil's illegal earnings were used in them.

Poudel has previously been convicted in a payment gateway corruption case. The Commission for Investigation of Abuse of Authority had filed a case against Poudel for acquiring illegal property.

According to the court's brief verdict, Poudel's legitimate income was found to be only 2 crore 21 lakh 57 thousand 80 rupees and 94 paisa. However, his expenses and investments during the same period were found to be 14 crore 97 lakh 27 thousand 318 rupees and 38 paisa. The difference between his legitimate income and total expenses, amounting to 12 crore 75 lakh 70 thousand 237 rupees and 43 paisa, had no disclosed legal source, and thus was deemed illegally acquired.

The court also took as evidence the fact that Poudel had a balance of 135,382 US dollars in his bank account in Singapore.

Although Poudel claimed that the account was not his, the verdict states that based on forensic examination and other evidence, the amount was confirmed to be his. Similarly, the court determined that the source of expenses incurred in the name of foreign travel and investments made in various places was also not disclosed.