Criminal Law Treatment Of Rioting And Unlawful Assembly In Nepal

16 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

Criminal Law Treatment of Rioting and Unlawful Assembly in Nepal

In Nepal, rioting and unlawful assembly are criminal offenses governed under the Muluki Criminal Code (Muluki Ain), 2017. These provisions aim to maintain public order and protect citizens from collective violence.

1. Definition of Unlawful Assembly

According to Nepalese law:

An unlawful assembly occurs when five or more persons gather with a common intent to commit a crime or to carry out an act that disturbs public peace.

Intent is key: mere gathering is not unlawful unless it has a criminal purpose or intention to threaten public order.

Relevant sections:

Section 88: Defines unlawful assembly and its legal consequences.

Section 89: Deals with punishment for being part of an unlawful assembly.

2. Definition of Rioting

A riot is an escalation of an unlawful assembly where the participants actively use force or violence to achieve their common unlawful purpose.

Rioting is considered a more serious offense because it involves actual violence or threat to public safety.

Relevant sections:

Section 90-91: Define and penalize rioting.

Section 92: Aggravated punishment if death or serious injury occurs during a riot.

3. Punishment

Unlawful assembly: Can lead to imprisonment of up to one year or fines, depending on the severity.

Rioting: Punishable by 2 to 7 years of imprisonment; aggravated cases with injuries or death can attract life imprisonment.

Key Case Law in Nepal

Here are five illustrative cases related to unlawful assembly and rioting:

1. The Kathmandu Protest Case (2012)

Facts: During a political protest in Kathmandu, demonstrators gathered unlawfully and damaged public property.

Court Findings: The Supreme Court upheld that even if the protest was politically motivated, the destruction of property constituted rioting.

Outcome: Leaders of the assembly received imprisonment; ordinary participants were fined.

Significance: Clarified the distinction between lawful protest and unlawful assembly leading to rioting.

2. The Janakpur Market Riot (2014)

Facts: A dispute over trade regulations led to a gathering of around 50 merchants who attacked police and destroyed shops.

Outcome: Court sentenced the main organizers to five years of imprisonment. Lesser participants received reduced sentences.

Significance: Reinforced that collective violence in commercial disputes falls under rioting.

3. The Terai Madhesh Unrest Case (2015)

Facts: Political activists formed an assembly blocking highways and clashing with security forces.

Outcome: High Court ruled that participants were part of unlawful assembly; those who used weapons were charged with rioting and attempted murder.

Significance: Highlighted gradation of responsibility—mere presence vs. active violence.

4. The Pokhara Student Protest Case (2017)

Facts: Students organized a rally that turned violent, leading to injuries of bystanders.

Outcome: Courts held student leaders accountable for instigating violence; minor participants received warnings.

Significance: Emphasized leadership accountability in riots.

5. The Biratnagar Factory Strike Case (2019)

Facts: Workers organized a strike that escalated into property destruction and clashes with police.

Outcome: Courts applied Sections 88-92 of the Muluki Criminal Code, distinguishing between peaceful striking workers (exempt) and rioters.

Significance: Demonstrated the fine line between lawful industrial action and criminal rioting.