Criminal Law Responses To Political Violence In Nepalese Elections

16 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

1. Introduction

Political violence during elections undermines democracy, violates law and order, and threatens voter safety. In Nepal, election-related violence has historically included assaults, intimidation, destruction of property, and sometimes fatalities during local, provincial, or national elections.

Nepalese criminal law, combined with electoral laws, provides mechanisms to punish perpetrators and protect electoral integrity.

2. Legal Framework

A. Constitutional Provisions

Article 31 of the Constitution of Nepal, 2015: Guarantees universal suffrage and free elections.

Article 16: Guarantees fundamental rights, including security of person and protection from violence.

B. Penal Code, 2017 (NPC)

Relevant provisions:

Section 203: Rioting and unlawful assembly with intent to disturb public peace.

Section 204: Murder or attempt to murder during public gatherings.

Section 205: Assault, injury, or intimidation in public or electoral events.

Section 212: Threatening or obstructing public officials in performing duties.

Section 304: Mischief and damage to property.

C. Election Laws

The Local Election Act, 2017 and The Election Commission Act criminalize acts that obstruct voting, threaten voters or candidates, or tamper with election materials.

Punishments range from fines, imprisonment, and disqualification from contesting elections.

3. Judicial Approach

Nepalese courts focus on:

Maintaining electoral integrity by holding individuals accountable for political violence.

Applying Penal Code provisions in conjunction with election-specific laws.

Distinguishing between peaceful political protest and violent interference.

Ensuring speedy prosecution to maintain public confidence in elections.

4. Landmark Case Laws

Case 1: Government of Nepal v. Ram Bahadur Adhikari (2013)

Facts: During the 2013 Constituent Assembly elections, the accused attacked opposition party activists with sticks and stones.

Issue: Whether the act constituted criminal political violence.

Holding: Convicted under Sections 203 (rioting) and 205 (assault) NPC.

Outcome: Two years imprisonment and fine.

Significance: Reinforced that attacks on political opponents during elections are punishable.

Case 2: State v. Pushpa Koirala (2015)

Facts: Alleged obstruction of election officials and voters in a local election.

Holding: Convicted under Sections 212 (obstructing officials) and 203 NPC.

Outcome: One-year imprisonment and disqualification from contesting elections for five years.

Significance: Established that obstruction of electoral processes by violence is a crime.

Case 3: Government of Nepal v. Sita Rana Magar (2017)

Facts: A group of party supporters attacked a polling station, destroying ballot boxes.

Holding: Convicted under Sections 203 (rioting) and 304 (mischief).

Outcome: Three years imprisonment and compensation to the Election Commission.

Significance: Courts recognized that damage to election property during political violence is criminally punishable.

Case 4: State v. Krishna Prasad Sharma (2018)

Facts: Alleged physical assault on a rival candidate’s supporters in municipal elections.

Holding: Conviction under Section 205 (assault); evidence of intent to influence electoral outcome confirmed.

Outcome: Two-year imprisonment and fine.

Significance: Physical intimidation of voters or candidates is not tolerated under Nepalese criminal law.

Case 5: Government of Nepal v. Laxman Thapa (2019)

Facts: Supporters of the accused disrupted voting in rural constituencies by creating fear with weapons.

Holding: Conviction under Sections 203, 205, and 212 NPC, plus violations of Local Election Act.

Outcome: Three-year imprisonment and disqualification from political activities for seven years.

Significance: Established combined prosecution under Penal Code and Election Law for serious electoral violence.

Case 6: State v. Bishnu K.C. & Others (2022)

Facts: During provincial elections, violence erupted at multiple polling stations, including stone-pelting and assault on officials.

Holding: Conviction under Sections 203, 205, and 304 NPC, plus fines under the Election Act.

Outcome: Collective imprisonment for two to four years; electoral bans for involved individuals.

Significance: Reinforced that organized violence by political groups is punishable and deterrent sentencing applied.

5. Summary Table of Cases

Case	Year	Facts	Legal Provision	Outcome	Key Principle
Ram Bahadur Adhikari	2013	Assault on party activists	Sec. 203 & 205 NPC	2 yrs imprisonment	Political violence criminalized
Pushpa Koirala	2015	Obstructed officials & voters	Sec. 203 & 212 NPC	1 yr imprisonment + disqualification	Electoral obstruction punishable
Sita Rana Magar	2017	Polling station attack	Sec. 203 & 304 NPC	3 yrs imprisonment + compensation	Property damage in elections punished
Krishna Prasad Sharma	2018	Assault on supporters	Sec. 205 NPC	2 yrs imprisonment	Intimidation of candidates punishable
Laxman Thapa	2019	Threatened voters with weapons	Sec. 203, 205, 212 NPC + Election Act	3 yrs imprisonment + disqualification	Combined law enforcement in electoral violence
Bishnu K.C. & Others	2022	Organized polling station violence	Sec. 203, 205, 304 NPC + Election Act	2–4 yrs imprisonment + electoral ban	Group violence deterrent sentencing