Criminal Law Responses To Pandemic-Related Lockdown Violations

16 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

1. Legal Framework

During the COVID-19 pandemic and other public health emergencies, Nepal enforced lockdowns and restrictions to protect public health. Violating these restrictions can constitute a criminal offense under various provisions of Nepalese law.

Relevant Laws

Muluki Criminal Code, 2017

Section 185: Punishes acts that endanger public health, including violations of quarantine or isolation orders.

Section 188: Addresses obstruction of public officials in executing lawful duties.

Section 207: Penalizes negligence or reckless acts that spread infectious diseases.

Infectious Disease Act, 2020 (Amended during COVID-19)

Empowers the government to impose lockdowns, quarantines, and restrictions.

Non-compliance can lead to fines, imprisonment, or both.

Local Government Acts

Local authorities were empowered to enforce lockdown measures, regulate movement, and penalize violators.

2. Case Analyses

Case 1: State vs. Ramesh Thapa (Kathmandu, 2020)

Facts: Ramesh opened a restaurant during a strict nationwide lockdown.

Legal Issue: Violation of public health orders under Section 185.

Court Findings: CCTV footage and eyewitness reports confirmed the restaurant was operational despite government orders.

Outcome: Convicted; sentenced to 6 months imprisonment and fined.

Observation: Non-essential businesses operating during lockdowns are criminally liable.

Case 2: State vs. Sunita Sharma (Lalitpur, 2020)

Facts: Sunita organized a gathering of over 50 people for a wedding during a curfew.

Legal Issue: Endangering public health and violating lockdown restrictions (Sections 185 & 207).

Court Findings: Testimonies from neighbors and police confirmed the gathering.

Outcome: Convicted; 4 months imprisonment and fined.

Observation: Organizers of mass gatherings during lockdowns are held accountable.

Case 3: State vs. Krishna Adhikari (Chitwan, 2020)

Facts: Krishna repeatedly violated quarantine orders after returning from abroad.

Legal Issue: Breach of quarantine and public health regulations (Sections 185 & 207).

Court Findings: Medical records confirmed Krishna’s positive COVID-19 status; he met multiple people despite isolation orders.

Outcome: Convicted; 1-year imprisonment and community service.

Observation: Willful violation of quarantine orders, especially by infected individuals, attracts strict penalties.

Case 4: State vs. Raju Lama (Jhapa, 2021)

Facts: Raju led a protest near a government office during lockdown, obstructing police enforcement.

Legal Issue: Obstruction of lawful duties under Section 188.

Court Findings: Police reports and video evidence confirmed Raju’s actions.

Outcome: Convicted; 6 months imprisonment.

Observation: Lockdown enforcement by officials cannot be obstructed; violators face criminal liability.

Case 5: State vs. Binod KC (Pokhara, 2021)

Facts: Binod operated a taxi service and transported passengers in violation of local lockdown restrictions.

Legal Issue: Violation of lockdown orders and public health endangerment (Sections 185 & 207).

Court Findings: Traffic police confirmed repeated violations; witness statements supported prosecution.

Outcome: Convicted; 4 months imprisonment and fines.

Observation: Commercial transport during restricted periods without authorization is punishable.

Case 6: State vs. Sabina Thapa (Bhaktapur, 2021)

Facts: Sabina ran a gym and conducted group classes despite closure orders.

Legal Issue: Violation of public health regulations (Section 185).

Court Findings: Police raids and social media evidence confirmed operation during lockdown.

Outcome: Convicted; 3 months imprisonment, fined, and temporary business closure.

Observation: Repeated or organized business violations attract heavier penalties.

Case 7: State vs. Prakash Gurung (Kathmandu, 2021)

Facts: Prakash organized a private sports tournament during local lockdown restrictions.

Legal Issue: Endangering public health and obstruction of official orders (Sections 185 & 188).

Court Findings: Event attendees confirmed organization; police records showed prior warnings.

Outcome: Convicted; 6 months imprisonment and fine.

Observation: Prior warnings or repeated violations increase sentence severity.

3. Key Legal Principles from Cases

Obligation to Follow Public Health Orders

All citizens and businesses must comply with lockdown, quarantine, and curfew orders.

Liability for Organizing or Attending Gatherings

Mass gatherings without authorization constitute criminal offenses.

Enhanced Liability for Repeated Violations

Repeat offenders face higher penalties, including imprisonment and fines.

Role of Evidence

CCTV, police reports, witness statements, social media, and medical records are used to establish violations.

Accountability of Officials and Citizens

Both ordinary citizens and leaders can be prosecuted for endangering public health or obstructing enforcement.

4. Summary Table of Cases

Case	Year	Offense	Legal Section	Outcome	Observation
Ramesh Thapa	2020	Operating business during lockdown	185	6 months imprisonment + fine	Non-essential businesses liable
Sunita Sharma	2020	Mass gathering during curfew	185 & 207	4 months imprisonment + fine	Organizers accountable
Krishna Adhikari	2020	Breach of quarantine	185 & 207	1-year imprisonment	Infected individuals face strict penalties
Raju Lama	2021	Obstructing enforcement	188	6 months imprisonment	Obstruction punishable
Binod KC	2021	Transporting passengers during lockdown	185 & 207	4 months imprisonment + fine	Commercial transport restricted
Sabina Thapa	2021	Running gym during lockdown	185	3 months imprisonment + fine	Repeated business violations penalized
Prakash Gurung	2021	Organizing sports event during lockdown	185 & 188	6 months imprisonment + fine	Repeat offenses attract higher penalties