Research On Health Safety And Penal Provisions In Nepal Research On Health Safety And Penal Provisions In Nepal
1. Legal Framework: Health and Safety in Nepal
Nepal regulates health and safety through multiple laws:
A. Muluki Criminal Code (2017 / 2074 BS)
Section 304 – Causing death by negligence (applied in medical negligence, workplace accidents).
Section 305 – Causing bodily harm by negligence.
Section 184-185 – Health safety violations causing risk to public (unsafe buildings, hazardous materials).
B. Public Health-Related Laws
Public Health Act, 2075 BS – Regulates sanitation, disease control, and food/drug safety.
Drugs Act, 2035 BS – Penalizes production, distribution, or sale of adulterated or unsafe drugs.
Medical Education and Practice Act, 2063 BS – Professional accountability of healthcare providers.
C. Workplace Safety
Labour Act, 2074 BS – Requires employers to ensure safety standards.
Factories Act, 2048 BS (repealed but relevant for older cases) – Regulated occupational safety and hazardous materials handling.
Penal provisions include fines, imprisonment, or both, depending on the severity and negligence involved.
2. Case Laws on Health Safety and Penal Provisions
Case 1: Medical Negligence Leading to Death (Kathmandu, 2018)
Facts:
Patient died due to wrong administration of anesthesia during surgery in a private hospital.
Family filed criminal complaint against surgeon and hospital.
Legal Issues:
Whether negligence amounts to criminal liability under Section 304 (death by negligence).
Whether hospital management can be held vicariously liable.
Outcome:
Surgeon convicted of criminal negligence, sentenced to 3 years imprisonment.
Hospital fined NPR 200,000 for failing to maintain proper monitoring systems.
Court emphasized duty of care in healthcare and accountability of professionals.
Takeaways:
Nepalese courts recognize medical negligence as a criminal offense if death occurs.
Hospitals have institutional responsibility for safety protocols.
Case 2: Unsafe Building Collapse (Pokhara, 2019)
Facts:
A commercial building collapsed due to poor construction and ignored safety codes.
Several deaths and injuries were reported.
Legal Issues:
Violations of Sections 184-185 (creating danger to public safety) and Section 304 (death by negligence).
Accountability of engineers, contractors, and local authorities.
Outcome:
Contractor and engineer convicted; imprisonment up to 5 years.
Municipal officer warned for failing to inspect construction properly.
Families received compensation under civil claims.
Takeaways:
Criminal liability extends to construction and public safety violations.
Safety negligence in public spaces is seriously penalized.
Case 3: Food Adulteration – Fake Milk Incident (Lalitpur, 2020)
Facts:
A dairy company sold adulterated milk containing harmful chemicals, causing illness in multiple consumers.
Complaint filed under Drugs Act 2035 BS and Public Health Act.
Legal Issues:
Manufacturing and selling unsafe food is criminal offense, punishable under public health laws.
Intentional vs. negligent contamination considered.
Outcome:
Company owners convicted; 3 years imprisonment plus fines.
Court emphasized strict liability for food safety to protect public health.
Takeaways:
Public health violations involving consumables can lead to severe criminal sanctions.
Companies cannot claim ignorance; duty to ensure safety is absolute.
Case 4: Workplace Accident in Factory (Biratnagar, 2017)
Facts:
Worker died due to improper machine guard in a factory.
Factory management had ignored safety standards despite warnings.
Legal Issues:
Violations of Labour Act, 2074 BS and Sections 305-306 of Criminal Code (negligence causing bodily harm/death).
Outcome:
Factory manager convicted of criminal negligence, 2 years imprisonment.
Factory ordered to implement safety standards.
Compensation awarded to family under Labour Act provisions.
Takeaways:
Employers are criminally liable for failing to maintain safe working conditions.
Preventive safety measures are legally mandatory.
Case 5: COVID-19 Public Health Violation (Kathmandu, 2021)
Facts:
Shop owner refused to enforce mask mandates and social distancing during government lockdown.
Multiple customers later tested positive, creating public health risk.
Legal Issues:
Violation of Public Health Act 2075 BS, Section 23 (endangering public health).
Penalties include fines or imprisonment for deliberate violation.
Outcome:
Owner fined NPR 50,000 and temporarily closed.
Court stated that individual compliance is critical to public health safety.
Takeaways:
Nepalese courts enforce public health regulations during epidemics.
Negligence endangering community health is criminally prosecutable.
Case 6: Adulterated Drugs – Painkillers Case (Kathmandu, 2019)
Facts:
Fake painkillers sold in local pharmacies; patients developed severe complications.
Authorities seized stock and filed criminal complaint under Drugs Act 2035 BS.
Legal Issues:
Liability of distributors and pharmacists.
Strict enforcement of drug safety provisions.
Outcome:
Distributors and shop owners convicted; 2–4 years imprisonment plus fines.
Highlighted strict liability principle in drug safety.
Takeaways:
Criminal liability exists for pharmaceutical safety violations, not just intent to harm.
Authorities actively enforce public health protections.
Key Observations
Criminal liability applies in both private and public health sectors: hospitals, factories, food/drug suppliers.
Negligence causing death or injury is punishable under Criminal Code Sections 304-306.
Public health violations are strictly enforced under Public Health Act and Drugs Act.
Courts often combine criminal prosecution, fines, and compensation for victims.
Employers, professionals, and public entities cannot evade liability by claiming lack of knowledge.
Emerging areas include pandemic-related violations, online drug sales, and workplace biohazards.
RELATED Blog
comments