Social Media Crime Laws Nepal 2026: ETA 2063 & Cyber Bureau Guide

Social media in Nepal — Facebook, TikTok, Instagram, YouTube, X, Telegram, WhatsApp — has transformed how Nepalis communicate, but it has also opened a new front for criminal conduct that was once confined to offline channels. Fake profiles impersonating ex-partners, sextortion via direct messages, hate speech against ethnic groups, deep-fake videos of public figures, doxxing of journalists, cyberbullying of school students, and deliberate misinformation campaigns all happen daily on platforms used by millions of Nepalis. The legal framework that addresses this conduct sits across two principal statutes — the Electronic Transactions Act 2063 (2008) on the digital side, and the Muluki Penal Code 2074 (2017) on the offline-mirror side — supplemented by the Cyber Bureau's specialised enforcement role.

This guide is the practical map of social-media-crime law in Nepal for victims, parents of victims, journalists handling threats, social-media managers facing impersonation, and lawyers handling Cyber Bureau filings. It covers the offence catalogue, the penalty schedule, the evidence priorities, the filing process at Bhotahiti or local district police, and the relationship between the digital-statute charges and the parallel offline-mirror charges.

Alpine Law Associates — trusted by 1,000+ clients across family, corporate, civil, and criminal cases in Nepal.

Speak with our lawyers today →

Our criminal law team handles victim-side social-media-crime cases — sextortion, fake-profile impersonation, online harassment, deep-fake-driven defamation — and defence-side cases for individuals charged under ETA 2063 Sec. 47. The recurring victim-side problem is the same: by the time the matter reaches us, the offending content has often been deleted by the platform, the URL is dead, and the screenshot trail is incomplete. The fix is upstream — preserve screenshots with visible URLs and timestamps before reporting the content to the platform, secure platform-takedown receipts, and file the FIR while the digital trail is still warm. The 35-day FIR window is strict; delay is the single biggest weakness in social-media-crime prosecutions.

What is a "social media crime" under Nepali law?

Nepal does not have a single "social media crime" statute. Instead, conduct on social media that the law criminalises is captured under the broader digital and criminal frameworks:

1. Electronic Transactions Act 2063 (2008) — the digital-conduct statute. Section 47 is the operative provision for publishing illegal material online. Sections 43–46 cover unauthorised access, computer-system damage, and source-code theft. Sections 47–51 cover the broader online-offence catalogue.
2. Muluki Penal Code 2074 (2017) — the offline-mirror statute. Defamation under Sec. 305-310, sexual offences under Sec. 219+, criminal intimidation, public-order offences, child-protection offences (with the Children's Act 2075 overlay) all apply where the conduct on social media maps to a recognised criminal offence.
3. Children's Act 2075 — the child-protection overlay where the victim is a minor.
4. Privacy Act 2075 — where the conduct involves unauthorised disclosure of personal information.

Most social-media-crime FIRs are filed under both ETA 2063 and Penal Code provisions because the same conduct typically engages multiple statutes. The Kathmandu District Court is the venue for ETA 2063 matters; District Court of the place where the offline offence occurred is the venue for Penal Code matters. Where charges run under both, the court determines the applicable sentence on conviction.

The social-media offence catalogue

The offences most commonly prosecuted in Nepal under the framework:

• Fake profile / impersonation — creating a profile in the name of another person to deceive others; falls within ETA 2063 Sec. 47 read with Penal Code forgery and cheating provisions
• Sextortion via DM — threatening to release intimate images obtained through prior relationship or grooming, demanding money or further images; ETA 2063 Sec. 47 + Penal Code criminal intimidation provisions
• Online defamation — false statements of fact damaging another person's reputation, posted on social media; ETA 2063 Sec. 47 + Penal Code Sec. 305 defamation
• Hate speech — content inciting hatred or violence against ethnic, religious, caste or other identifiable groups; ETA 2063 Sec. 47 + Penal Code public-order offences
• Doxxing — publishing personal identifying information (home address, phone number, workplace) of another person to enable harassment; ETA 2063 Sec. 47 + Privacy Act 2075 + Penal Code criminal intimidation
• Deep fakes and manipulated media — synthetic videos or images depicting a person in fabricated scenarios, particularly sexual or compromising; ETA 2063 Sec. 47 + Penal Code defamation + Children's Act 2075 if minor depicted
• Cyberbullying — sustained online harassment, particularly directed at minors; ETA 2063 Sec. 47 + Children's Act 2075 if victim is a minor
• Misinformation and fake news — deliberately false content spread to mislead, particularly during sensitive periods (elections, public-health emergencies); ETA 2063 Sec. 47 read with public-order provisions
• Account hacking and unauthorised access — taking control of another person's social-media account; ETA 2063 Sec. 43-46 (unauthorised computer access)
• Online financial fraud via social media — investment scams, fake-product sales, romance scams; ETA 2063 + Penal Code cheating

ETA 2063 Section 47 — the principal social-media offence

Section 47 of the Electronic Transactions Act 2063 is the principal provision used to prosecute social-media offences in Nepal. The text covers any person who publishes or causes to be published, in electronic form, content that is illegal under Nepali law — content that violates public morality, harms the dignity of any person, causes contempt or hatred against any caste, ethnicity or religion, or affects national integrity.

Penalty: imprisonment up to 5 years, or a fine up to NPR 100,000, or both.

The breadth of Section 47 is its strength and its weakness. As a prosecution tool it captures a wide range of conduct without requiring the prosecution to identify a more specific offence. As a free-expression matter it has been criticised for being too broadly drafted, leading to use against journalists, satirists and political commentators alongside use against actual harassers and abusers. The Supreme Court has issued guidance on the application of Section 47 in several leading cases narrowing the operational scope, particularly for journalistic work.

The Penal Code 2074 offline-mirror layer

Where the social-media conduct also amounts to an offence under the Penal Code 2074, charges run in parallel:

The dual-charge approach — ETA 2063 Sec. 47 alongside the relevant Penal Code section — is the standard prosecutorial practice. The court determines the applicable sentence on conviction, with the harsher penalty typically prevailing. For the broader cyber-crime framework see our cyber crime laws guide; for the defamation framework specifically see our defamation law guide.

Filing a complaint with the Cyber Bureau

The Cyber Bureau under Nepal Police, headquartered at Bhotahiti, Kathmandu, is the specialised investigation unit for digital offences including social-media crimes. The Bureau accepts complaints in person at the Bhotahiti office, by email to cyberbureau@nepalpolice.gov.np, and through the online portal at cyberbureau.nepalpolice.gov.np/report-cyber-crime/. Out-of-Valley complainants can file at the nearest district police office, which forwards the matter to the Bureau or to the Cyber Crime Investigation Division at the relevant Provincial Police Office.

The Bureau publishes four downloadable complaint forms by category:

1. Obscene content on social media — for non-consensual intimate images, sextortion, sexual content distributed online
2. Online financial fraud — for investment scams, fake-product sales, romance scams, payment-platform fraud via social media
3. Fake or hacked account recovery — for impersonation and unauthorised account access
4. Other cyber offences — for hate speech, defamation, cyberbullying, doxxing, deep fakes and other matters not covered by the first three

For the full Cyber Bureau filing process, contact details and complaint-form requirements see our dedicated Cyber Bureau guide.

Evidence preservation — the single biggest determinant

The most consistent finding across our practice is that evidence preservation in the first 24–72 hours determines case strength. Specific actions:

• Screenshot before reporting to the platform — Meta, TikTok, X and YouTube routinely remove flagged content within hours of platform reporting; once the URL is dead, the screenshot alone is much harder to authenticate
• Capture URL + timestamp + sender ID in every screenshot — these three elements are essential for evidentiary value
• Platform takedown receipt — file a platform-side report and save the takedown receipt; this strengthens the evidentiary chain even where the content is later removed
• Export DM threads — most platforms support data download / chat export; use this where available
• Witness statements — names, contact details and short written accounts of friends or colleagues who saw the content
• Backup on multiple devices — phone screenshots, cloud backup, email-to-self with attachments
• Identification evidence — what is known about the offender (real name if known, social-media handle, prior interactions, mutual contacts)

For digital evidence, the chain of custody from screenshot to file submission matters as much as the content itself. The Cyber Bureau and the Court look for evidence that has been preserved cleanly, not reconstructed after the fact.

Defences typically run by the accused

• Identification challenge — was it really my client who posted the content; supported by IP-trace gaps, account-sharing arguments, prior account-hacking complaints
• Account-hacking defence — my account was compromised; not me
• Free-expression defence — content was legitimate criticism, satire, journalism or commentary; the Supreme Court has narrowed Section 47's scope on free-expression grounds in several cases
• Contextual interpretation — the content does not actually carry the meaning the prosecution attributes to it
• No mens rea — for offences requiring intent (defamation), absence of intent to defame
• Statute-of-limitations / FIR window challenge — late FIR weakens the case
• Procedural compliance challenge — failure to follow Children's Act 2075 child-friendly procedure where the victim is a minor

For accused parties, immediate engagement of an advocate is critical because the social-media-crime cases move fast — first appearance and bail decision typically happen within 48 hours of arrest.

Where the victim is a minor — the Children's Act 2075 overlay

Where the victim of a social-media crime is a minor (under 18), the Children's Act 2075 procedural framework runs in parallel with the ETA 2063 / Penal Code charges. The mandatory provisions:

• Separate child-protection officer at the police station handles intake
• In-camera trial with the public excluded
• Victim-identity confidentiality in court records and media coverage
• Counselling support through investigation and trial
• Time-bound disposal — child sexual abuse cases get priority listing
• Parent or guardian present during all questioning of the minor victim

For sexual offences against minors specifically (sextortion, child pornography, grooming), the Children's Act offence provisions add up to 15 years' imprisonment and NPR 150,000 fine to the ETA 2063 / Penal Code charges. See our pedophile law guide for the full child-victim framework.

Practical advice for victims

1. Preserve evidence first, report to platform second — Meta will delete flagged content within hours
2. File the FIR within 35 days — the window is strict and late filings face significant prosecution challenges
3. Use the Cyber Bureau for serious matters, district police for routine ones — both routes converge at the same prosecution
4. Get an advocate involved early — case strategy, evidence preservation and FIR drafting all benefit from advocate input at the start
5. Do not engage the offender through DM or comments after detection — engagement can compromise the case and may itself become a separate concern
6. Save the digital trail off-platform in case the offender deletes their account before investigation

Practical advice for accused parties

1. Engage an advocate immediately on summons or arrest
2. Do not delete posts or messages after notice of investigation — this can attract obstruction charges
3. Document any account-hacking history if claiming hacked-account defence
4. Preserve your own communication trail — DM threads, screenshots, friend statements
5. Consider settlement / apology in defamation cases where the facts support it; non-compoundable offences may proceed regardless but voluntary remediation can affect sentencing