Law of Hurt in Nepal (2026): Simple vs Grievous Hurt Guide

Most physical-violence cases that reach a Nepali District Court are not homicide and not assault in the abstract — they are charges of "hurt" under Sections 191 to 197 of the Muluki Penal Code 2074 (2017). The hurt provisions are the workhorse of personal-violence prosecution in Nepal, covering everything from a punch in a domestic argument to permanent disability caused by a road accident, from a bar-room fracas to a workplace injury inflicted by a supervisor. The 2074 codification structured the offence into a clean set of categories — simple hurt, grievous hurt, hurt by provocation, negligent hurt — and matched each to a distinct punishment tier and compensation framework. See our criminal-law practice area for related matters.

This 2026 (2083 BS) practitioner's guide is the working view of the law of hurt in Nepal: every section a Nepali District Court will cite, the difference between simple and grievous hurt, the punishment tiers from a NPR 30,000 fine to ten years' imprisonment, the provocation defence under Section 194, the negligent-hurt offence under Section 195, and how victims pursue both a criminal prosecution and a civil tort claim alongside. Whether you are a victim deciding whether to file an FIR, a defendant facing a charge, or counsel preparing the file, this is the document you will work from.

The hurt provisions overlap with several other statutes — the Domestic Violence (Offence and Punishment) Act 2066 where the parties are family members, the Caste-Based Discrimination Act 2068 where the hurt has a discriminatory motive, and the Vehicle and Transport Management Act for road-traffic injuries. Counsel running a hurt file evaluates which statute (or combination) gives the strongest victim relief or the cleanest defence path. This guide walks through the framework section by section.

Alpine Law Associates — Nepal Bar Council-registered criminal-law team handling hurt prosecutions, victim-side compensation claims, defence representation and parallel tort recovery for 1,000+ clients across the Bagmati region.

Speak with our lawyers today →

What is "hurt" under the Penal Code 2074?

Section 191 of the Penal Code 2074 defines hurt as causing bodily pain, transmission of disease, or infirmity to another person. The definition is deliberately broad — it captures every form of physical impact on the body, from a slap to a deep stab wound, from infecting another person with a contagious disease to causing temporary loss of function. The mental-state requirement is intention or knowledge: the accused either intended to cause the hurt or knew that the act was likely to cause hurt. Pure accidents without negligence do not amount to hurt; what they may amount to is the lesser offence of negligent hurt under Section 195.

Hurt is the foundation tier; grievous hurt under Section 192 is the elevated tier where the injury is of a kind the law treats as permanent or life-threatening. The two tiers carry very different punishment ranges and the line between them — set by Section 192's list — is what every defence and prosecution argument in a hurt file turns on.

Grievous hurt under Section 192 — the eight categories

Section 192 lists the categories of hurt that the law treats as grievous. The accused is liable for grievous hurt where the act causes any of the following: (1) emasculation; (2) permanent privation of the sight of either eye; (3) permanent privation of the hearing of either ear; (4) privation of any member or joint; (5) destruction or permanent impairment of the powers of any member or joint; (6) permanent disfiguration of the head or face; (7) fracture or dislocation of a bone or tooth; or (8) any hurt that endangers life or causes the victim to be unable to follow ordinary pursuits for at least 20 days. The list is exclusive — an injury that does not fit one of the categories is simple hurt regardless of how painful or visible it is.

The fracture sub-category is the most common gateway to a grievous hurt charge. A fractured wrist from a single punch, a fractured nose from a slap, a fractured rib from a kick, a fractured skull from a fall during a quarrel — all are grievous hurt and all carry up to 10 years' imprisonment. The Medico-Legal report identifying the fracture (typically with X-ray confirmation) converts a simple-hurt FIR into a grievous-hurt charge-sheet. Defence counsel evaluating an early case file routinely seek a second medical opinion to test whether the fracture is genuine, recent, and attributable to the alleged act.

Punishment tiers — simple, grievous, with weapon

The Penal Code 2074 punishment tiers for hurt are layered. Simple hurt under Section 191 is punishable with imprisonment of up to 3 years and/or a fine of up to NPR 30,000. Grievous hurt under Section 192 is punishable with imprisonment of up to 10 years and/or a fine of up to NPR 100,000. Where the hurt is caused by a deadly weapon or by a means likely to cause death (acid, fire, corrosive substance, firearm), additional sections engage — including Section 192(ka) for acid-attack hurt — and the punishment escalates further.

The court fixes sentence within the statutory range applying the National Criminal (Sentencing) Act 2074. Aggravating factors include premeditation, the use of a deadly weapon, multiple injuries, vulnerability of the victim (child, elderly, person with disability), prior convictions of the accused, and breach of trust (where the accused was in a position of authority over the victim). Mitigating factors include youth of the accused, voluntary surrender, compensation paid to the victim before trial, cooperation with the investigation, and provocation falling short of the Section 194 threshold.

Provocation reduction under Section 194

Section 194 provides a sentence reduction where the hurt was caused on grave and sudden provocation. Like the analogous reduction in homicide under Section 179, the accused must establish four elements: (1) there was provocation, (2) it was grave, (3) it was sudden, and (4) the act was committed in the heat of passion before there was time to cool down. Where the elements are made out, the punishment falls below the standard tier — courts typically sentence in the bottom third of the range.

The provocation defence is partial — it does not exonerate the accused, only reduces the sentence. Fact-patterns include a person who responds to a public insult with a slap that fractures the offender's jaw, a spouse who reacts to discovered infidelity with a thrown object that breaks the partner's arm, or a victim of an unprovoked assault who retaliates excessively. Counsel must lead evidence of the immediate context, the absence of premeditation, and the proportionality (or near-proportionality) of the reaction.

Negligent hurt under Section 195

Section 195 covers hurt caused by negligence — the accused failed to exercise the standard of care expected of a reasonable person, and that failure caused the injury. The punishment is up to 6 months' imprisonment and/or a fine of up to NPR 5,000 — substantially lower than intentional or knowledge-based hurt. Most cases under Section 195 are road-traffic injuries where the driver was at fault but not driving recklessly, workplace accidents where the supervisor or operator failed to follow safety protocols, and household accidents where the person responsible failed to take ordinary precautions.

Negligent hurt cases often run in parallel with civil compensation claims. The criminal court fixes culpability and may direct compensation to the victim; the civil court (or the Compensation Tribunal for motor-vehicle cases) determines the quantum of damages. Counsel running such files coordinates the criminal defence with the civil exposure, since admissions in one forum can be used in the other. Insurance proceedings (motor insurance, workers' compensation insurance) add a further layer that the criminal-civil strategy must coordinate with.

Medical evidence — the Medico-Legal report

Every hurt prosecution stands or falls on the Medico-Legal report. When an FIR is registered, the District Police Office refers the victim to a Government hospital or designated medical facility for examination. The medical examiner records the nature of the injuries, the likely mechanism, the time of infliction, and grades the injury — simple or grievous, with reference to the Section 192 list. The report is the gateway document for the charge tier: a "simple" certification supports a Section 191 charge-sheet, a "grievous" certification supports a Section 192 charge-sheet.

Defence counsel attacking the Medico-Legal report scrutinise: (1) the time gap between the alleged incident and the examination (a delayed examination weakens causation), (2) the chain of custody for X-ray plates and tissue samples, (3) the qualifications of the examining doctor and consistency with hospital records, (4) whether the injury pattern matches the alleged mechanism (a fall vs a beating produces different bruise distributions), and (5) any history of pre-existing injury that may explain the present findings. The cross-examination of the medical witness at trial is often where contested hurt cases are won or lost.

Self-defence and excess of private defence

The right of private defence under Section 18 of the Penal Code 2074 applies as a complete defence to hurt the same way it applies to homicide. Every person has the right to defend their own body, the body of another person, their property, and the property of another person, against an unlawful act. Where the force used in defence does not exceed what was reasonably necessary, the hurt is not an offence — the accused is acquitted. Where the force exceeds necessity (excess of private defence), the act is culpable but at a reduced sentence tier.

Proportionality is the key concept. A person attacked with fists may not lawfully respond with a knife unless the circumstances reasonably show that the fists threatened serious injury. A person facing a threat in the home may lawfully use household objects to defend themselves; a person who pursues the attacker after the threat has passed and inflicts hurt loses the defence. The District Court applies a fact-sensitive proportionality test based on the immediate circumstances, the relative strength of the parties, the availability of retreat, and the conduct of the accused after the threat ended.

Consent — the sport, medical and tattoo carve-outs

Consent of the victim is a defence to hurt in specific contexts. Section 16 of the Penal Code 2074 carves out injuries inflicted in the course of lawful sport (boxing, wrestling, martial arts, contact games) where the participant consented to the ordinary risks of the sport, surgical and medical procedures performed by qualified practitioners with the patient's consent, body modifications including tattoos and piercings performed with the recipient's consent, and certain customary practices where consent is given. The consent must be free, informed and given by a person competent to give it; consent of a child below the age of competence, or consent obtained by fraud, force or coercion, is not valid.

The consent defence does not extend to grievous hurt outside the medical context. A consensual fist-fight that produces a fractured arm is still a grievous-hurt offence; the consent does not exonerate the parties. The Code's policy is that the State has an interest in preventing serious bodily harm even between consenting adults outside of regulated contexts.

Domestic-context hurt — the Domestic Violence Act 2066 overlap

Where the hurt is inflicted by a family member, the Domestic Violence (Offence and Punishment) Act 2066 (2009) runs in parallel with the Penal Code 2074. The DV Act defines domestic violence broadly to include physical, sexual, mental and economic abuse and provides a victim-protection framework — interim protection orders, residence orders, compensation orders, and short custodial sentences for offenders. The hurt offences under the Penal Code carry higher sentences for serious injury; the DV Act adds protective relief that the criminal court can grant alongside.

Counsel running a domestic hurt case evaluates whether to charge under Penal Code Sections 191/192 alone, under the DV Act alone, or under both. The strategic choice depends on the severity of the injury (DV Act is more victim-friendly for moderate injuries; Penal Code is needed for grievous hurt), the availability of evidence (DV Act has more flexible evidentiary standards), and the relief sought (DV Act provides protection orders, the Penal Code provides incarceration). Our practitioner guide on domestic violence in Nepal sets out the parallel framework.

Acid-attack hurt under Section 192(ka)

Section 192(ka) of the Penal Code 2074 — added by the 2076 amendment — addresses hurt caused by acid or similar harmful substances. Where the act causes disfigurement of the face, the punishment is 5 to 8 years' imprisonment plus a fine of NPR 100,000 to NPR 500,000. Where the act causes disfigurement of other body parts or causes bodily pain, the punishment is 3 to 5 years' imprisonment plus a fine of NPR 50,000 to NPR 300,000. The full amount of the fine must be given to the victim as compensation — a unique feature that makes the acid-attack provision more victim-friendly than standard grievous hurt. Our detailed guide on acid attack law in Nepal walks through the full framework.

Compounding — when private settlement ends a hurt case

Some hurt offences are compoundable — the victim and the accused can compose (settle) and the case is closed. Simple hurt under Section 191 is compoundable with the consent of the District Court; grievous hurt under Section 192 is generally non-compoundable but the court may consider settlement in sentencing. The compounding framework has practical importance: in family disputes, neighbour quarrels, and minor commercial scuffles, parties often reach a settlement (including monetary compensation) that the court approves and the criminal case ends.

Non-compoundable cases — grievous hurt, hurt with a deadly weapon, hurt to a child or person with disability — proceed regardless of victim consent. The State's interest in prosecuting serious violence overrides private settlement. Defence counsel in non-compoundable cases work the case toward an acquittal or reduced charge rather than a settlement.

Compensation to the victim

The Penal Code 2074 sentencing framework permits the District Court to order direct compensation from the convicted person to the victim. The amount reflects the actual loss — medical expenses, lost wages, pain and suffering, future medical needs, and any permanent disability. Compensation is in addition to (not in lieu of) imprisonment and fine. Where the convicted person is unable to pay, the Victim Compensation Fund under the Victim Protection Act 2075 may step in for serious cases.

The criminal compensation order does not preclude a civil tort claim. The victim may sue the offender in civil court for damages on the same facts; the criminal compensation is set off against the civil award. Counsel running a victim-side hurt file routinely files both criminal complaint and civil suit to maximise recovery.

Limitation periods for hurt offences

Section 196 of the Penal Code 2074 sets the limitation for FIR filing — generally 3 months for simple hurt and 6 months for grievous hurt from the date the victim or the family came to know of the offence. The shorter periods reflect the relative seriousness compared to homicide (which has no limitation). Limitation extensions apply where the victim was a child at the time of the offence, where the victim was prevented from filing by threats from the accused, or where the victim was incapacitated by the injury itself. Counsel filing an FIR at the boundary of the limitation period documents the reason for any delay to pre-empt a limitation objection.

How can Alpine Law Associates help with hurt cases?

Alpine Law Associates handles hurt cases on both sides. For victims, we draft and file the FIR with precise particulars, secure the Medico-Legal examination at the right facility, monitor the District Government Attorney's investigation and charge-sheet, attend trial as watching counsel, and pursue compensation under the sentencing framework plus a parallel civil tort claim. For accused persons, we appear at arrest, prepare and argue the bail application, lead the defence at trial including private-defence, provocation, consent and chain-of-custody arguments, and run the High Court appeal where the District Court conviction stands.

Our team coordinates the hurt file with related homicide, criminal-liability and sentencing dimensions, as well as procedure under the 2074 Codes. As a full-service law firm in Nepal, we field a single counsel relationship across the criminal, civil and family-law dimensions of a hurt matter.

Speak with our lawyers today →

Last reviewed: April 2026