By Our Reporter bimalendra-nidhi-and-upendrakanta-aryalRevelation of  Deputy  Prime Minister Bimalendra Nidhi’s plan to withdraw the cases of serious crimes involving the Madhesi agitators has drawn flak from Inspector General of Nepal Police Upendra Kanta Aryal. Aryal has strongly opposed the preparations made to withdraw the cases relating to the Kailali carnage of last year when the Tharu agitators had killed seven police officers including a minor in Tikapur of  Kailali last year. Aryal said withdrawal of serious criminal cases would demoralize the Nepal Police. The Tharu agitators had killed a senior police officer and other policeman brutally using spares and other weapons.  Madhesi leaders like Rajendra Mahato and NC lawmaker Amaresh Kumar Singh had instigated the Tharu leaders to attack the police. The police administration nowhere releases the criminals who had attacked and killed the police. But in Nepal, the government is ready to do anything to remain in power. Nidhi, who is often blamed for working in the Indian interest, is deliberately trying to weaken the security agencies by preparing to withdraw the cases of criminals. During his New Delhi visit, Prime Minister Pushpa Kamal Dahal met Resham Chaudhary, one of the masterminds behind the Tikapur massacre. The meeting looked unusual as the executive head was seen talking with a criminal who had been at large. The main opposition party CPN-UML has also  warned the government not to withdraw any case against those involved in a violent police-protestor clash in Tikapur of Kailali district last year. Amid speculations and media reports that the government was preparing to withdraw the cases against those being tried for their involvement in the carnage so as to appease Madhes-centric parties, the main opposition said such a withdrawal would be against the Constitution, rule of law and democratic norms and values. The party said withdrawal of cases would  promote impunity, discourage willpower of the agencies responsible for peace and security of the nation and to create doubt in the society, without entering into the investigative report of such incidents which had affected democratic norms and rule of law.