A complaint registered at the Cricket Association of Nepal (CAN) asks the governing body to clarify who legally owns the Nepal Premier League franchise Janakpur Bolts and whether CAN's rules were followed in the franchise's operation. The letter was signed by Siddhartha Thapa on behalf of Nepali cricket supporters and well-wishers and registered at CAN's Mulpani office as number 03, according to the source report. The report gives the registration date as 12 October 2083 BS, which does not correspond to a valid Bikram Sambat date in the current year, so the date should be verified against the letter before publication.

The complaint states that it does not seek to accuse any individual. Thapa is reported to have said the questions are meant to protect the long-term interest of the NPL, the fairness of the tournament, and institutional transparency.

The immediate trigger, as described in the complaint, is a public announcement by Utsav Sigdel, who is known as a director of Janakpur Bolts. Sigdel announced that he had separated from the daily operations, administration, financial decisions, and player and staff management of Janakpur Bolts and Dream Sports Pvt. Ltd. The complaint says that the announcement raised questions about the team's actual legal ownership and share structure. It asks CAN to say whether Sigdel was only a director or manager or also a shareholder. If he was a shareholder, it asks for official information on whether his shares remain with him or have been transferred.

The complaint asks CAN to answer five questions, as summarized in the source report:

On the first issue, the complaint cites CAN's invitation for proposals issued on 18 July 2081 BS. It says that under that invitation, a company registered in Nepal, or a foreign company, could acquire an NPL franchise only through a joint venture with a Nepali company. The complaint asks CAN to disclose which company holds the Bolts franchise under that framework. The invitation itself was not among the supplied material, so this description of its terms rests on the complaint's account.

The supplied material contains no response from CAN, the NPL organizers, Janakpur Bolts, Dream Sports Pvt. Ltd., or Utsav Sigdel. The text of Sigdel's announcement was not supplied, and it is not known whether CAN has accepted the complaint, set a timeline for replying, or begun a review. The complaint's questions are requests for information that have not been tested against CAN's records or the company's registration.

The complainants have urged CAN to investigate, make the facts public, and clear up confusion among supporters and stakeholders. What CAN says publicly about the Bolts' ownership and any approvals is the next development to watch.