Prosecution Of Extortion Rackets In Urban Nepal
🧾 1. Legal Framework in Nepal
Extortion is criminally punishable under Nepal’s Muluki Criminal Code (2017), particularly:
Section 291 (Extortion by Threats) – Using threats to obtain property, money, or favor.
Section 293 (Extortion Using Violence or Force) – Using physical force or intimidation.
Section 296 (Gang Extortion / Organized Crime) – Punishment increases for group-based criminal activity.
Punishments include:
Imprisonment ranging from 1 to 10 years depending on severity.
Fines proportional to the extorted amount.
Confiscation of assets obtained through extortion.
Urban areas in Nepal, such as Kathmandu, Pokhara, and Biratnagar, have historically seen the rise of extortion rackets due to dense population, commercial activity, and informal businesses vulnerable to coercion.
⚖️ 2. Detailed Case Analyses
Case 1: Kathmandu Extortion Racket (2018)
Facts:
A gang targeted small business owners in Thamel, Kathmandu, demanding monthly “protection fees.” Threats included physical assault and property damage.
Legal Issues:
Organized extortion under Sections 291 and 296 of the Criminal Code.
Intimidation and use of coercion to obtain money.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Police investigation included undercover operations and victim testimonies.
7 gang members were arrested, and extorted money was recovered.
Court sentenced the accused to 3–7 years imprisonment and imposed fines.
Significance:
Showed the importance of victim cooperation and covert investigations in prosecuting urban extortion networks.
Case 2: Pokhara Business Extortion (2019)
Facts:
A local gang targeted tourist transport companies, demanding payments to allow operations at bus terminals. Failure to comply resulted in vandalism.
Legal Issues:
Extortion using threats and economic coercion.
Organized activity constituting racketeering.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Evidence included CCTV footage, victim statements, and intercepted communications.
Court convicted 5 gang members under Sections 291 and 293.
Prison sentences ranged from 2–5 years, with partial restitution to victims.
Significance:
Demonstrated integration of technological evidence in proving threats and coordination among gang members.
Case 3: Biratnagar Construction Company Extortion (2020)
Facts:
Extortionists approached construction companies, threatening to disrupt projects unless “protection fees” were paid.
Legal Issues:
Threatening violence to obtain property and money.
Gang extortion under Sections 293 and 296.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Police arrested 4 suspects; forensic evidence included threatening letters and recorded calls.
Convicted with sentences of 3–6 years imprisonment.
Seized money was returned to businesses.
Significance:
Highlighted the role of documentary evidence and call recordings in proving coercive intent.
Case 4: Kathmandu Nightclub Extortion (2017)
Facts:
Gangsters targeted nightclub owners in Kathmandu, threatening physical harm to staff unless monthly payments were made.
Legal Issues:
Extortion via threats and intimidation in commercial settings.
Multiple victims indicated organized crime.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Undercover police operations identified leaders and members.
6 gang members convicted; sentences ranged from 2–5 years imprisonment.
Seizure of vehicles used for intimidation was enforced.
Significance:
Showed importance of multiple victim testimonies and victim protection measures during prosecution.
Case 5: Bhaktapur Extortion of Street Vendors (2021)
Facts:
Street vendors were forced to pay daily fees to a local gang to operate in tourist areas. Non-compliance led to harassment and destruction of stalls.
Legal Issues:
Use of violence or intimidation to obtain money from multiple victims.
Organized extortion under Section 296.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Police arrested 3 primary suspects; recovery of extorted money occurred.
Court issued imprisonment of 1–4 years and fines.
Restitution provided to victims.
Significance:
Demonstrated that even low-value commercial targets are vulnerable and the courts recognize multiple victims as an aggravating factor.
Case 6: Kathmandu Residential Extortion (2022)
Facts:
A gang demanded money from residents in a high-rise apartment, threatening property damage if payment was refused.
Legal Issues:
Extortion through intimidation and threat of property damage.
Pattern of gang activity establishing organized crime liability.
Prosecution & Outcome:
Police investigation included CCTV, witness testimonies, and forensic handwriting analysis on threat letters.
4 members convicted; sentences ranged from 2–5 years imprisonment.
Confiscation of extorted funds.
Significance:
Highlighted the role of forensic analysis in proving written threats in extortion cases.
🧩 3. Key Observations
Victim testimony is critical, particularly when threats are verbal or coercion is subtle.
Forensic and technological evidence (CCTV, recordings, letters) strengthens prosecution.
Organized gang activity attracts harsher sentences under Nepal’s criminal code.
Restitution and asset recovery are key components of punishment.
Urban extortion cases often involve multiple victims and commercial targets, increasing prosecutorial complexity.
🏛️ 4. Conclusion
Prosecution of extortion rackets in urban Nepal relies on:
Thorough police investigations, often using undercover operations.
Direct and circumstantial evidence to prove threats and coercion.
Demonstrating organized crime patterns for harsher sentencing.
Protecting victims to ensure testimony is secured.
Courts have consistently imposed imprisonment, fines, and confiscation to deter extortion rackets, emphasizing both punishment and restitution.
RELATED Blog
comments