What legal protections exist in Nepal for stalking and harassment cases like Smriti Paudel’s?

Cases of stalking and harassment are becoming more visible in Nepal, highlighting both protections in the law and gaps in enforcement. The recent public appeal by Smriti Paudel has brought attention to these issues.

The Smriti Paudel case

Smriti Paudel has said that she has faced persistent stalking and harassment from a man for several months. She claims he follows her in vehicles, shows up at her exam centers, waits near her home, enters her classroom when no teachers are present, and even brought others to threaten a friend who supported her. She also alleges that he has created fake social media accounts in her name, spread false rumors, and made threats against her and her friends.

Paudel filed a case with the police, but she says the agreements reached were ineffective, and the harassment has continued. She is now appealing for stronger legal protection so she can live safely and continue her studies without fear.

Legal protections in Nepal

Constitutional rights
Nepal’s Constitution guarantees the right to live with dignity, the right to privacy, and special protections for women.

Domestic Violence (Crime and Punishment) Act, 2066 (2009)
This law covers physical, mental, sexual, and economic violence in domestic or familial relationships. Punishments include fines up to NPR 25,000, up to six months in prison, or both. Repeat offenses carry higher penalties.

Muluki Criminal Code, 2017 (2074 B.S.)

• Section 224 covers sexual harassment, including verbal, nonverbal, or physical acts, with penalties of up to three years in prison and fines up to NPR 30,000.
• Section 226 specifically prohibits stalking and repeated harassment.

Cybercrime and privacy laws
Electronic harassment, such as repeated unwanted messages or calls, can lead to up to two years in prison, fines up to NPR 20,000, or both. Cyber harassment is punishable, but enforcement can be challenging.

Workplace harassment laws
The Sexual Harassment (Prevention) Act, 2071 provides a way to report harassment at work. The Labour Act, 2074 requires employers to take action, including possible dismissal of offenders.

Applying the law to the Paudel case

Paudel’s claims of stalking, classroom intrusion, threats, fake accounts, and online harassment could fall under:

• Stalking and repeated harassment (Section 226)
• Sexual harassment (Section 224)
• Cyber harassment, if electronic platforms were used
• Workplace or educational harassment laws, if applicable

Challenges and enforcement gaps

Despite these laws, enforcement can be weak:

• Many people are not aware of their rights under laws like the Domestic Violence Act.
• Cases may be resolved with symbolic agreements rather than thorough investigation.
• Cyber harassment laws exist but are sometimes unclear or difficult to enforce.

Online discussions show frustration over slow justice, especially when perpetrators have political or social influence.

Smriti Paudel’s case shows how serious stalking and harassment can be and the importance of effective legal response. While Nepal’s laws provide tools for accountability, their success depends on enforcement, awareness, and commitment. A full investigation into Paudel’s allegations is crucial to ensure safety and justice for her and others in similar situations.