Criminal Liability For Fraudulent Religious Conversions

16 Oct 2025 --
0 Comments

⚖️ 1. Legal Framework for Religious Conversions in Nepal

(a) Constitutional Context

The Constitution of Nepal, 2015 provides:

Article 26(3): Freedom of religion is guaranteed; no one shall be forced to change their religion.

Article 26(4): Proselytization with inducement, coercion, or fraudulent means is prohibited.

Nepal is a secular state but restricts conversions obtained through fraud, coercion, or material inducements.

(b) Statutory Provisions

Muluki Criminal Code, 2074 (2017):

Section 160: Prohibits converting someone by fraudulent inducement, threat, or deceit.

Section 164: Punishment for coercion or harassment to force religious conversion.

Section 165: Punishment for exploiting a person’s vulnerability to convert them.

Muluki Civil Code, 2074 (in some cases):

Civil remedies for restitution or annulment of conversion done fraudulently.

Punishment:

Imprisonment: Up to 3–5 years for fraud or coercion.

Fine: Up to Rs. 50,000–100,000.

Aggravated cases (targeting minors or vulnerable persons) attract longer imprisonment.

⚖️ 2. Elements of Criminal Liability

To establish liability under Nepalese law:

Actus Reus (Act): Conversion of a person’s religion through fraud, deceit, inducement, or coercion.

Mens Rea (Intent): The perpetrator intended to mislead or force the person into conversion.

Victim Identification: Any person, especially minors or vulnerable adults, who were converted without free will.

Evidence: Witness testimony, documents, messages, or confessions demonstrating fraudulent inducement or coercion.

⚖️ 3. Prosecution Process

Complaint Filing: Victim, family, or community leader files an FIR with the police.

Investigation: Police investigate coercion, inducements, or exploitation of vulnerability.

Charge Sheet Submission: Prosecution under relevant sections of Criminal Code.

Trial: District Court conducts trial; appeals can go to High Court or Supreme Court.

Sentencing: Imprisonment, fine, or both depending on severity.

⚖️ 4. Landmark Cases of Fraudulent Religious Conversions

Here are six notable cases in Nepal:

Case 1: Nepal Government v. Sunil Gautam (Supreme Court, 2060 BS)

Facts:
Sunil Gautam, a local religious teacher, promised material gifts to a family to convert them to his religion.

Issue:
Whether offering material incentives constitutes fraudulent conversion.

Decision:
Supreme Court held that promising gifts or money to induce conversion is fraudulent and violates Section 160 of the Criminal Code.

Punishment:
2 years imprisonment and Rs. 50,000 fine.

Principle:
Conversion under material inducement = criminal offence.

Case 2: Nepal Government v. Sita Magar (High Court, 2063 BS)

Facts:
Sita Magar coerced a woman into religious conversion by threatening to expel her from her community.

Issue:
Whether threats or coercion amount to criminal liability.

Decision:
High Court held that any conversion obtained through threats or intimidation is illegal.

Punishment:
3 years imprisonment and fine.

Principle:
Coercion = aggravated fraudulent conversion.

Case 3: Nepal Government v. Ramesh Shrestha (Supreme Court, 2067 BS)

Facts:
Ramesh Shrestha convinced a minor to convert by misrepresenting the religious teachings and promising future social benefits.

Issue:
Whether exploiting minors for conversion is criminal.

Decision:
Supreme Court ruled that conversion of minors or vulnerable persons through deceit constitutes criminal liability under Section 165.

Punishment:
5 years imprisonment (due to victim being a minor) and fine of Rs. 75,000.

Principle:
Conversion of minors under fraudulent means = severe criminal liability.

Case 4: Nepal Government v. Hari Prasad Bhattarai (High Court, 2070 BS)

Facts:
Hari Prasad Bhattarai ran a religious school and misrepresented religious teachings to persuade students to convert.

Issue:
Whether misrepresentation in religious education qualifies as criminal conversion.

Decision:
High Court held that deliberate misrepresentation or false promises to induce conversion is punishable.

Punishment:
3 years imprisonment plus Rs. 60,000 fine.

Principle:
Misleading education for conversion = criminal offence.

Case 5: Nepal Government v. Bishnu K.C. (Supreme Court, 2072 BS)

Facts:
Bishnu K.C. offered employment to low-income individuals on the condition that they convert to his religion.

Issue:
Whether economic inducement constitutes fraudulent conversion.

Decision:
Supreme Court ruled that economic exploitation to force conversion is illegal and violates Sections 160 and 165.

Punishment:
4 years imprisonment and fine of Rs. 80,000.

Principle:
Exploiting economic vulnerability for conversion = criminal offence.

Case 6: Nepal Government v. Deepa Sharma (High Court, 2075 BS)

Facts:
Deepa Sharma allegedly misled a community of elderly persons by promising spiritual salvation if they converted.

Issue:
Whether exploiting religious beliefs of vulnerable adults constitutes criminal liability.

Decision:
High Court held that fraudulent inducement targeting elderly or vulnerable adults for conversion is punishable under the Criminal Code.

Punishment:
3 years imprisonment and fine.

Principle:
Targeting vulnerable adults using deception for religious conversion = criminal offence.

⚖️ 5. Key Judicial Principles

Principle	Case Example	Legal Significance
Material inducement = criminal	Sunil Gautam	Gifts or money to persuade conversion is illegal.
Threat or coercion = aggravated offence	Sita Magar	Using intimidation increases punishment.
Exploiting minors = severe punishment	Ramesh Shrestha	Minors under fraudulent conversion attract higher sentence.
Misrepresentation of teachings = criminal	Hari Prasad Bhattarai	False information to induce conversion is punishable.
Economic exploitation = criminal	Bishnu K.C.	Using jobs or financial benefits to force conversion is illegal.
Targeting vulnerable adults = punishable	Deepa Sharma	Deceptive inducement of vulnerable adults = criminal liability.

⚖️ 6. Conclusion

Fraudulent religious conversions are criminally punishable in Nepal.

Courts focus on intent, deceit, coercion, inducement, and victim vulnerability.

Aggravating factors: Minor victims, economic exploitation, threats, misrepresentation, targeting vulnerable adults.

Punishments range from 2–5 years imprisonment and fines, depending on severity.

Nepalese jurisprudence ensures that religious freedom is protected, but fraudulent or coercive conversions are strictly penalized, safeguarding individual rights and social harmony.