10.2 The Five Prescribed Cases

(1) Unity Life International Ltd. vs. Government of Nepal (NKP 2069, No. 4, D.N. 8814) — the veil-doctrine landmark Citation (as prescribed): Nepal Kanoon Patrika, 2069 B.S., No. 4, Decision No. 8814. (Verified details: Writ No. 2066-WO-1293; decided 2068/12/15; the petitioner — the company's chairman Kashiram Gurung on the company's behalf; the respondent — the Office of the Council of Ministers/the Government; the writ — certiorari and mandamus.) The saga's background (the verified context): Unity Life International Ltd — a registered company that grew into a vast unauthorised deposit-and-investment operation (the hundreds-of-thousands-strong member network; the cooperative-style and insurance-style schemes). Upon investigation following public complaints, the Government acted: the bank accounts frozen, the premises sealed, and legal action taken against the directors and officers. The company petitioned the Supreme Court: the actions violated its legal and fundamental rights. The issues (as identified in the published commentaries): (1) could the Government investigate the company's activities on public complaints? (2) had the company conducted banking-and-insurance-like regulated businesses without the regulatory approvals? (3) could the corporate veil be lifted for fraud and personal benefit? (4) were the company's rights violated by the government action? The Supreme Court's holding (the verified core): the writ petition dismissed/quashed. The Government had the power and the duty to investigate complaints involving possible public harm — the investigation itself…