Government spokesperson Sasmit Pokharel has said he knows nothing about why the mobile phone of broker Inma Sapkota was kept with Prime Minister's chief adviser Kumar Ben for two days before it was sent for forensic examination. Speaking to journalists after a Cabinet meeting in Kathmandu, Pokharel said he had heard only rumours about the matter and had received no official confirmation of how or why the device spent those two days with Ben. His remarks, reported by Nepal Press and Nagarik News, came in response to questions from journalists about the handling of a phone that stands as a piece of evidence. Pokharel, the government's designated spokesperson, made clear that he was in no position to explain the sequence of events, leaving the central question unanswered even as attention on the case continues to grow.

Only rumours, no official confirmation

Pokharel's comments came in the usual setting for government briefing, the press interaction that follows a Cabinet meeting in Kathmandu. Journalists used the opportunity to press the spokesperson on the reports concerning Inma Sapkota's mobile phone and its two-day stay with the Prime Minister's chief adviser before it was sent for forensic testing.

According to Nagarik News, Pokharel said that no information was available to him indicating that Inma's mobile phone had been kept by the Prime Minister's chief adviser. In other words, the spokesperson drew a clear line between what he had heard informally and what he could confirm officially.

  • Pokharel said he had only heard rumours about the phone being with Kumar Ben.
  • He stated that he had no official confirmation regarding why the phone was kept with Ben.
  • He indicated that no information on the matter was available to him in his capacity as spokesperson.

The significance of the response lies in the position of the person giving it. As government spokesperson, Pokharel is the official through whom the government normally explains its positions and clarifies contested issues. His acknowledgment that he has nothing beyond rumours means that, at least publicly, there is as yet no official account of how a piece of evidence in a sensitive matter came to spend two days with the chief adviser to the Prime Minister.

Two days in the custody of the chief adviser

The question at the centre of the story is a simple one: why was Inma Sapkota's mobile phone kept with Kumar Ben for two days before being sent for forensic examination? That is the question journalists have been putting to officials, and it is the question Pokharel said he could not answer.

As a general matter, the handling of mobile phones and other electronic devices that serve as evidence is expected to follow a documented chain of custody, so that it is clear who held the item, when, and under what authority. When a device passes through a period that is not explained by any official record, the integrity of what the device contains can become open to question, and the findings of any subsequent forensic examination can become harder to defend.

Against that backdrop, the reported timeline has drawn scrutiny. What is established by the reports is that the phone was with Ben for two days and was then sent for forensic examination. What is not established, on the basis of what officials have said so far, is how the phone came to be with Ben, why it remained with him for that period, and who was responsible for sending it onward for testing. Pokharel himself said he had no knowledge of the reason for the arrangement, and the reports do not record any official explanation from any other source.

Ben yet to respond

The news outlet Setopati had sought a reaction from chief adviser Kumar Ben on the matter, according to the summary of the reporting that accompanied Pokharel's remarks. The reports do not indicate that Ben has offered any public explanation for the phone's two-day stay with him.

That silence has left the spokesperson's response as the only public comment from the government side. Until Ben or another official with direct knowledge speaks on the record, the account of events remains incomplete, resting on the reported fact of the two-day custody and the spokesperson's acknowledgment that he knows nothing about it.

Questions the government has yet to answer

What the reports establish

  • Inma Sapkota's mobile phone was kept with Prime Minister's chief adviser Kumar Ben for two days.
  • The phone was subsequently sent for forensic examination.
  • Government spokesperson Sasmit Pokharel said he had no knowledge of why the phone was kept with Ben.
  • Pokharel said he had heard only rumours and had no official confirmation.

What remains unclear

  • How the phone came to be with Ben in the first place.
  • Why it remained with him for two days before being sent for testing.
  • Who authorised the arrangement and who sent the phone for forensic examination.
  • Whether the two-day period was recorded in any official custody documentation.
  • What the forensic examination of the device is expected to cover.

For now, Pokharel's position is that the government's spokesperson cannot explain what happened because no official information has reached him. The episode has therefore turned attention squarely on the office of the chief adviser, with journalists continuing to seek a reaction from Ben and the public left with a notable admission: the person whose job is to speak for the government says he, too, is waiting for answers.