Criminal Liability For Cyberbullying In Nepal
Criminal Liability for Cyberbullying in Nepal – Detailed Cases
Case 1: Extortion and Non-Consensual Image Sharing in Kathmandu
Facts:
A young woman shared private images with a male acquaintance via social media. Later, the male threatened to post these images publicly unless she paid a large sum of money. This caused severe emotional distress and harassment.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
Electronic Transactions Act (ETA), 2008 – unauthorized dissemination of private data.
Muluki Criminal Code, Sections on Extortion and Harassment – sections related to intimidation, blackmail, and mental harm.
Court Reasoning:
The court held that transmitting private material without consent with intent to harm constitutes a criminal offense, even if no physical harm occurred.
The mens rea (intent to threaten, intimidate, or extort) was clearly present.
Significance:
Shows that cyberbullying in Nepal can overlap with extortion or harassment.
Even though “cyberbullying” is not defined as a separate crime, courts can prosecute using ETA and general criminal provisions.
Case 2: Online Defamation Against a Public Figure
Facts:
A social media user posted false and derogatory statements about a local political leader, accusing him of corruption and unethical conduct. The posts went viral and caused reputational damage.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
Muluki Criminal Code – Sections 207 (defamation) and 208 (publication of defamatory material).
ETA, 2008 – electronic transmission of defamatory material.
Court Reasoning:
The court emphasized that publishing false statements via social media qualifies as defamation.
Liability arises even when the platform is digital, as the law treats electronic communication as equivalent to written or verbal communication.
Significance:
Established that online defamation can attract criminal liability.
Reinforces that cyberbullying in the form of false accusations can be actionable.
Case 3: Harassment of Female Students via Social Media
Facts:
A group of male students created a fake Facebook profile of a female student and circulated offensive messages, photos, and private details to harass her. The victim filed a complaint to the Cyber Bureau.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
ETA, Sections 47 and 48 – for misuse of electronic media to harass or threaten.
Muluki Criminal Code Sections 218–221 – intimidation and mental harassment.
Court Reasoning:
Creating a fake account with the intent to humiliate or threaten the victim constitutes criminal harassment.
Evidence collected included screenshots, IP addresses, and witness testimonies, which were crucial for establishing liability.
Significance:
Shows that impersonation and coordinated harassment online are punishable.
Sets precedent for digital harassment cases among students and young adults.
Case 4: Blackmail Using Threatening Messages
Facts:
A man sent threatening messages over Facebook Messenger to a former acquaintance, demanding money under the threat of releasing private conversations and videos.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
ETA, 2008 – Section 47: transmitting threatening material electronically.
Muluki Criminal Code – Section 11 (Threats), Section 235 (Fraud/Extortion).
Court Reasoning:
The court held that repeated threatening messages constitute cyber harassment.
The combination of electronic transmission and intent to intimidate made this a cyberbullying offense.
Significance:
Confirms that harassment, intimidation, and extortion via digital platforms fall under criminal liability.
Demonstrates the importance of the Cyber Bureau for evidence collection.
Case 5: Online Stalking of a Minor
Facts:
A 17-year-old student was repeatedly contacted online by a stranger who attempted to extract personal information and threatened to expose her photos if she refused to comply.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
Muluki Criminal Code Sections 217–218 – stalking, harassment, mental harm.
ETA Section 47 – for repeated unwanted communication through electronic means.
Court Reasoning:
The court emphasized the vulnerability of minors and the severe psychological harm caused by online stalking.
Liability was established because the perpetrator knowingly targeted a minor and persisted despite warnings.
Significance:
Illustrates that cyberbullying targeting minors is treated seriously.
Highlights the intersection between child protection laws and cybercrime laws.
Case 6: Coordinated Cyberbullying Campaign Against a Journalist
Facts:
A journalist received coordinated online abuse and threats from multiple users on social media after publishing an investigative report. Threats included spreading false rumors, personal attacks, and calls for public shaming.
Legal Provisions Invoked:
ETA, Section 47 – electronic dissemination of harmful or threatening content.
Muluki Criminal Code, Section 218 – harassment and intimidation.
Court Reasoning:
The court recognized the collective nature of the harassment and its impact on freedom and safety.
Liability was imposed on the main perpetrators identified through digital forensics.
Significance:
Demonstrates that cyberbullying can take the form of organized attacks on individuals.
Legal recognition of psychological harm and intimidation as actionable offenses.
Key Observations
Cyberbullying is not yet a standalone offence in Nepal, but criminal liability arises through:
ETA provisions (unauthorized transmission, harassment, threats)
Muluki Criminal Code (defamation, harassment, intimidation, extortion, stalking)
Intent (mens rea) and repeated actions are crucial to establish criminal liability.
Evidence collection (screenshots, IP addresses, witness statements) is key for prosecution.
Courts treat digital harassment similarly to offline harassment, but specific cyber nuances (fake accounts, anonymous messages) are increasingly considered.
Vulnerable groups (women, minors, journalists) are often the targets, and courts may impose stricter liability.
RELATED Blog
comments