Research On Religion, Culture And Criminal Justice In Nepal
1. Pun Devi Maharjan v. Government of Nepal (2008)
Facts:
This case concerned the Newar tradition of selecting a young girl as the “Kumari,” or living goddess. The petitioner argued that the restrictions placed on the Kumari (limited mobility, ritual obligations) violated her fundamental rights, particularly the rights of children and freedom of movement.
Court Decision:
The Supreme Court recognized the Kumari tradition as an important cultural and religious practice with deep historical significance. However, it emphasized that the practice should not violate fundamental rights. The Court directed the government to ensure the Kumari received education and proper care and asked for measures to reintegrate former Kumaris into society.
Significance:
Demonstrates how Nepal’s judiciary balances cultural preservation with individual rights.
Shows that cultural/religious practices are not inherently immune to legal scrutiny.
Highlights the protective role of criminal and civil law in safeguarding vulnerable individuals within cultural practices.
2. Charles Mendes Case (1983–1989)
Facts:
Charles Mendes, a Christian pastor, was distributing Bibles and preaching Christianity in Nepal. Under the old Muluki Ain (Country Code), proselytizing was prohibited if it threatened the dominant religion, Hinduism. Mendes was initially acquitted, but the Supreme Court later convicted him of proselytism and sentenced him to six years’ imprisonment.
Court Decision:
The Supreme Court held that promoting a religion in a way that undermines the dominant religion could constitute a criminal offense. The ruling enforced restrictions on religious conversion and propagation.
Significance:
Illustrates the tension between freedom of religion and protection of traditional cultural/religious norms.
Highlights how cultural dominance can shape criminal justice enforcement.
Demonstrates how criminal law in Nepal can regulate religious practices.
3. Rukum West Massacre (2020)
Facts:
In West Rukum district, six youths (four Dalits) were murdered by villagers after an inter-caste relationship came to light. The attack was fueled by caste-based discrimination and cultural taboos against inter-caste relationships.
Court Decision:
The District Court sentenced 24 individuals to life imprisonment for murder and two others to two years for involvement. However, the High Court later acquitted the accused on charges of caste-based discrimination.
Significance:
Highlights how deeply caste and culture can influence violent behavior.
Reveals challenges in prosecuting cultural crimes such as untouchability or caste-based discrimination.
Demonstrates the limitations of criminal justice when societal cultural norms conflict with legal principles.
4. Ramechhap Caste-Discrimination Case (2022)
Facts:
A Dalit minor was held hostage in Ramechhap by a non-Dalit individual because of caste prejudice. The case was prosecuted under the Caste-Based Discrimination and Untouchability Act.
Court Decision:
The court sentenced the accused to one year in prison for caste discrimination and an additional 3.5 years for hostage-taking. A fine of Rs. 75,000 was imposed.
Significance:
One of the few cases where the law was effectively applied to a caste-discrimination issue.
Shows that criminal law can intervene in culturally normalized discrimination.
Encourages recognition that cultural practices may have legal consequences if they violate human rights.
5. Pastor Acharya Conversion Case (2020)
Facts:
Pastor Acharya was charged with proselytism in Dolpa district for encouraging conversions from Hinduism to Christianity. The case was prosecuted under Sections 157 and 158 of the Penal Code, which prohibit obstructing religious practices or attempting religious conversions.
Court Decision:
The court initially held that the pastor’s actions violated the law, citing the prohibition on conversions that disturb established religious practices. The case sparked debates about religious freedom and minority rights.
Significance:
Highlights the legal limits on religious expression in Nepal.
Shows how criminal justice enforces cultural dominance of traditional religion.
Demonstrates ongoing tension between human rights and criminal law in cultural/religious contexts.
6. Witchcraft Accusations and Punishments in Terai (Various Cases, 2018–2021)
Facts:
Several women in rural Terai regions were accused of witchcraft (often due to illness or misfortune in the village). Cultural beliefs led to harassment, physical abuse, and sometimes imprisonment of the accused. Cases were prosecuted under general assault and harassment laws.
Court Decision:
Courts have started convicting perpetrators of physical and psychological abuse related to witchcraft accusations. Sentences range from fines to imprisonment, emphasizing the criminal liability of culturally motivated violence.
Significance:
Shows intersection of superstition, culture, and criminal law.
Demonstrates the judiciary’s role in protecting vulnerable individuals from harmful cultural practices.
Reflects gradual social change and awareness of human rights within traditional settings.
Summary of Insights from These Cases
Cultural practices are protected but not absolute – the courts allow cultural or religious traditions as long as they do not violate fundamental rights.
Dominant religion and caste influence law enforcement – Hinduism and caste hierarchies often shape prosecutions and convictions.
Criminal justice is a tool for social reform – intervention in child rights (Kumari), caste discrimination, and witchcraft shows law challenging harmful cultural norms.
Tension between rights and tradition persists – conversion laws, caste biases, and cultural violence highlight continuing friction between modern rights and traditional practices.
RELATED Blog
comments