Kathmandu. Nepal Investment Mega Bank is currently facing a case of while auctioning the collateral of Smart Cell. Bank claims to have auctioned using the powers given by BAFIA, but C IB has filed lawsuit in the court through the Government Attorney’s Office claiming that the auction was done in collusion with the government. All the directors of the bank except one are the defendants. However, in all these cases, the bank’s deputy CEO Mahesh Dhakal and director Madan Acharya have been spared.

How did Mahesh Dhakal, who was in the Loan Recovery Committee, survive?

Mahesh Dhakal, Deputy CEO, has been involved in all the processes of loan recovery and of the bank.He has participated in every meeting of the committee and has directly participated in all the decisions of auctioning the mortgage of Smart Cell. Not only this, Dhakal is also directly involved in the Loan Recovery Committee as he is in the Loan Recovery Committee ( and other works related to the auction. But even when all the directors and the CEO himself are the CEO, Dhakal employees in the bank are .

Many people thought that Mahesh Dhakal would also be a defendant in this case.But he was released on the basis of his general denial statement. In his statement to the CIB, he has denied that is not involved in this case. However, he is directly involved in all the work related to the auction of loans.

Acharya joined the board, took allowances, signed, but how did he survive?

Madan Acharya is more surprising than Mahesh Dhakal. Not only did he attend the meeting that decided to auction the property of Smart Cell, he has also taken the allowance for the meeting. He also signed the minutes of the board meeting and did not sign the page that decided to auction the smart sale. He has not written any note of dissent on this subject. However, other operators claim } that the page was missed due to hasty signing because they had to go abroad immediately.

However, he has denied it to the police.He has claimed in his police statement that he was not involved in the auction case.

Now the question arises, if the auction is the same, the case is the same, is the same case and against the CEO case then why the Deputy C against the EO is not run. If a case of {{}} is going on against the other directors for making a decision regarding the file in the Board, then how did Madan Acharya survive by not writing a note of on the auction of the smart cell {{} and on the issue of the auction of the smart cell, how did Madan Acharya survive? This issue is being watched with great interest by experts in banking and banking cases cases.