Torture Law in Nepal (2026): Constitution Art 22 + Penal Code 2074

Torture law in Nepal combines Article 22 of the Constitution of Nepal 2072, the Compensation Relating to Torture Act 2053, and the National Penal Code 2074. A victim may have a civil compensation route, criminal remedies, and an NHRC investigation; the compensation petition has a stated 35-day filing window. See our criminal law practice area for related legal support.

Key Takeaways

Nepal protects people in custody through constitutional, civil and criminal rules. The District Court, National Human Rights Commission, police, Attorney General and higher courts may have different roles. The exact route depends on the custody facts, evidence, filing date, injuries, and whether the claim seeks compensation, criminal accountability, or both.

• Article 22 prohibits physical or mental torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment of a person held in custody.
• The Compensation Relating to Torture Act 2053 provides a civil compensation framework for torture by public officials.
• The current material identifies a 35-day period for filing a compensation petition at the District Court.
• The National Penal Code 2074 criminalises torture by public officials and provides imprisonment and fine as possible punishment.
• The National Human Rights Commission can investigate allegations, recommend action and help expose impunity concerns.
• Historical awards cited in the supplied material range from NPR 1 lakh to NPR 5 lakh; this is not a guaranteed or fixed current award.
• The civil compensation route and criminal prosecution address different outcomes and may need separate assessment.

What counts as torture under Nepali law?

Nepali law treats torture as physical or mental pain or suffering inflicted in custody by a public official or person acting in an official capacity. The Compensation Relating to Torture Act 2053 identifies purposes including confession, information, punishment, intimidation, coercion and discrimination; the State-authority element separates torture from ordinary private violence.

The allegation normally turns on more than an injury alone. The supplied material describes torture as involving pain or suffering, official control, and a purpose connected with obtaining information, punishment, intimidation, coercion or discrimination. The Act also extends beyond a narrow police-cell description to situations involving State authority.

Article 22 protects every person who is detained or held in custody. It covers physical and mental torture, as well as cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Ordinary violence between private citizens is not automatically torture under this framework; the current material distinguishes that conduct from torture and refers to other Penal Code offences, including grievous hurt.

The alleged official may be a police officer, security-force member, prison worker, immigration official, military member or another person exercising State authority. The correct legal classification depends on the facts. If the conduct occurred outside custody or without the required official connection, a lawyer should assess another criminal or civil route instead.

Why does custodial torture matter legally in Nepal?

Custodial torture in Nepal engages a fundamental constitutional right, a civil compensation mechanism and possible criminal liability. Article 22 makes the prohibition direct and provides that a victim is entitled to compensation. The same protection applies to physical and mental torture and does not depend on the victim proving a final criminal conviction first.

The constitutional wording is broad. It prohibits cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and states that an act contrary to the protection is punishable by law. The supplied material identifies no national-security or anti-terror carve-out from this constitutional protection.

The Constitution also supports direct constitutional litigation. The current material identifies writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 133 and the High Courts under Article 144. The appropriate remedy still depends on the facts, the relief sought, available evidence and the court’s jurisdiction.

Nepal’s international framework also matters. Nepal acceded to the United Nations Convention against Torture, commonly called CAT, on 14 May 1991. The supplied material also identifies ICCPR Article 7, the Optional Protocol to CAT, and Istanbul Protocol standards in the wider human-rights framework. It states that Nepal has not ratified the Optional Protocol.

Which laws create torture liability in Nepal?

Nepal’s framework combines constitutional protection, civil compensation, criminal punishment and human-rights investigation. Article 22 supplies the constitutional guarantee; the Compensation Relating to Torture Act 2053 addresses compensation; the National Penal Code 2074 addresses criminal torture by public officials; and the NHRC investigates allegations and recommends action.

The Nepal Law Commission is identified in the supplied sources as the canonical host for Nepal’s statutes, including the Compensation Act and Penal Code. The National Human Rights Commission is the relevant national body for the NHRC torture investigation role. Confirm the current statutory text and filing practice before acting.

Who can use the compensation and investigation routes?

Victims may use the compensation framework, while a relative may file for a deceased victim under the current material. The Government of Nepal is treated as the civil respondent for State-official torture. Individual officials may face criminal proceedings, and the NHRC may investigate the allegation and recommend action.

The compensation claim is directed at State liability for torture rather than a private damages claim against an unrelated individual. The supplied material identifies the District Court within whose jurisdiction the torture occurred as the court for the compensation petition.

A family member’s role becomes especially important when the victim dies, cannot safely act, or needs assistance preserving evidence. The current material permits a relative to file for a deceased victim. It does not establish a single universal rule for every family relationship, so the exact claimant should be verified before filing.

The NHRC route has a different function from a District Court compensation petition. The Commission investigates allegations, recommends action and tracks the impunity gap. A recommendation is not described in the supplied material as the same thing as a court-awarded compensation order or a criminal conviction.

How does a torture case proceed in Nepal?

A torture case can move through evidence preservation, NHRC investigation, criminal reporting and a District Court compensation petition. These routes may operate in parallel, but the correct sequence depends on safety, custody records, medical evidence, the filing date and the remedy sought. No fixed overall processing time is established in the supplied material.

1. Record the incident and custody context. Note where the person was held, which authority controlled the custody and what conduct is alleged.
2. Seek medical examination and preserve available records. Medical reports, photographs, witness accounts and custody records may help establish what happened.
3. Consider an NHRC complaint or investigation request. The NHRC’s role includes investigating allegations and recommending action.
4. Consider a criminal report. The current material describes an FIR at the police, investigation, a charge sheet by the Attorney General, trial at the District Court and appeal to the High Court.
5. Assess the compensation petition at the District Court. The stated 35-day period makes the filing date and the correct starting point critical.
6. Present the State-liability claim and supporting proof. The Government of Nepal is identified as the civil defendant for torture by its officials.
7. Review appeal or constitutional options where necessary. The supplied material identifies Supreme Court jurisdiction over torture compensation appeals and constitutional writ jurisdiction.

This sequence is a practical map, not a promise that every case follows every stage. The police, Attorney General, District Court, High Court, Supreme Court and NHRC have different functions. Our team can help you assess which route fits the facts without promising an investigation, prosecution or award.

What evidence and documents help prove custodial torture?

Evidence supports a torture claim when it connects the person’s custody, the official actor, the alleged conduct, the resulting harm and the requested remedy. The supplied material identifies medical reports, witness testimony, custody records, injury photographs and expert opinions. It does not establish that every item is mandatory in every filing.

• Medical examination reports may record physical injuries and psychological consequences.
• Witness testimony may help explain the custody setting, conduct and changes in the victim’s condition.
• Custody records may help establish who held the person and for how long.
• Photographs of injuries may help preserve visible evidence that can change over time.
• Expert opinion may address physical or psychological consequences and the relationship to the alleged treatment.

The current material refers to Istanbul Protocol standards for documenting torture. That reference does not remove the need to check what the receiving court or investigating body will accept. Ask for a case-specific evidence plan rather than assuming that one medical report will prove every part of the allegation.

The supplied material places the initial burden on the victim to establish that torture occurred while in State custody. It also states that, once that is established, the burden may shift to the State to disprove or justify the conduct. Because the wording is conditional, the evidence needed at each stage matters.

What is the 35-day compensation deadline?

The Compensation Relating to Torture Act 2053 is described as requiring a compensation petition within 35 days. The supplied material refers to the act of torture and also describes release from custody as relevant where the victim was detained. Because the starting point can affect eligibility, verify the calculation with the District Court or a lawyer immediately.

The safest approach is to treat the filing period as urgent from the incident date while checking the release-from-custody position where it applies. Do not assume that an NHRC complaint, police report or later criminal case automatically replaces the compensation petition or stops the civil period.

The supplied material does not establish a fixed time for NHRC investigation, police investigation, trial, appeal or payment after an award. Court schedules, investigation steps, evidence, objections and the facts of the case can affect progress. Verify any current office or court timeline before relying on it.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Waiting until the 35-day period is nearly over before checking the correct starting date.
• Assuming that an NHRC investigation is identical to a District Court compensation case.
• Describing private violence as torture without examining custody and State authority.
• Failing to preserve medical, witness, custody and injury evidence.
• Assuming a civil compensation claim automatically produces a criminal conviction.

What compensation and state liability can follow?

State liability for torture places the civil compensation claim against the Government of Nepal when its public officials commit the alleged torture. The District Court determines compensation on the evidence. The supplied material identifies severity, duration, medical needs, earning loss, consequences and dignitary harm as relevant considerations.

The current material cites historical court awards ranging from NPR 1 lakh to NPR 5 lakh. That range is not stated as a statutory tariff, current minimum or guaranteed result. It also says that awards have trended higher in egregious cases. The actual result depends on the court’s assessment of the facts and proof.

The court may recommend departmental action against the individual official. The current material states that the executive is required to consider that recommendation. This is different from criminal punishment. A compensation award addresses the civil remedy; departmental and criminal consequences follow their own legal routes.

What cost factors should you plan for?

No current government charge, court fee or professional fee is established in the supplied material, so this guide does not quote one. Your overall burden may depend on government charges, medical documentation, travel, evidence preservation and legal work. Confirm current charges with the receiving office and obtain a current professional estimate through Alpine Law Associates.

How does criminal prosecution differ from compensation?

Criminal liability under the National Penal Code 2074 focuses on punishing a public official who tortures a person in custody or under State authority. The Code is described as providing imprisonment and fine, while the civil route seeks compensation from the State. A criminal case and compensation claim therefore serve different legal purposes.

The National Penal Code 2074 came into force on 17 August 2018, according to the current material. It criminalises torture by public officials as a distinct offence. The punishment reflects the gravity of the act, the official’s position and the consequences for the victim.

The supplied material also identifies enhanced punishment for custodial torture causing serious bodily injury and torture involving vulnerable people, including children, pregnant women and persons with disabilities. It does not provide a sentence range or fine amount in the material supplied for this rewrite, so those details must be verified from the current law.

The described criminal path runs through the National Criminal Procedure Code 2074: an FIR at the police, investigation, a charge sheet by the Attorney General, trial at the District Court and appeal to the High Court. The Office of the Attorney General is identified as responsible for prosecution under the State Cases Act.

There is also a structural concern. Alleged perpetrators may belong to the same State apparatus involved in investigation or custody. The NHRC and civil society organisations are identified in the current material as helping document cases and expose the gap between a civil award and criminal prosecution. That concern does not decide any individual case.

What alternatives and edge cases should you consider?

A victim may pursue constitutional, civil, criminal and NHRC options, but no single route fits every allegation. The key edge cases involve private violence, death of the victim, disputed custody, serious injury, vulnerable victims, delayed filing and evidence held by State bodies. Each issue can change the legal assessment.

Illustrative Nepal scenario

Illustrative only: a person is held by a public authority and later reports physical and mental pain. The family preserves medical material, identifies possible witnesses and records the custody setting. A lawyer may then assess an NHRC investigation, a criminal complaint and a District Court compensation petition. This example predicts no filing result, deadline extension or court award.

If the victim has died, the current material states that a relative may file the compensation petition. The family should verify who can act, the date from which the 35-day period is calculated and what evidence remains available. A death does not make the constitutional or criminal issues irrelevant, but the correct procedural route must be checked.

If the alleged violence was by a private person outside State custody, the Compensation Relating to Torture Act route may not be the correct classification. The current material distinguishes ordinary private violence from torture and refers to other Penal Code offences. A lawyer should assess the facts rather than attach the torture label automatically.

For a constitutional challenge or appeal, the supplied material identifies the Supreme Court and High Courts as relevant courts. The Supreme Court of Nepal is also identified in the verified sources as having jurisdiction over torture compensation appeals. The court, remedy and filing basis must still be checked for the particular case.

The wider international framework includes CAT, ICCPR Article 7 and Istanbul Protocol documentation standards. The supplied material states that Nepal has not ratified the Optional Protocol to CAT. International standards may inform the legal context, but the domestic filing route, deadline and court jurisdiction remain central for a Nepal claim.

Custodial cases also raise witness-protection concerns. The current material identifies witness protection as required for custodial cases and notes an impunity gap. If a witness or victim faces pressure or danger, raise that issue promptly with the appropriate authority and legal counsel rather than treating it as a secondary matter.

What is the short answer on torture law in Nepal?

Nepal prohibits custodial torture under Article 22, permits a civil compensation claim under the Compensation Relating to Torture Act 2053, and criminalises official torture under the National Penal Code 2074. The NHRC can investigate and recommend action. The 35-day compensation period makes prompt legal assessment essential.

• Identify the custody and State-authority facts.
• Preserve medical, witness, custody and injury evidence.
• Check the 35-day compensation period without delay.
• Assess civil, criminal, constitutional and NHRC routes separately.

This article provides general information, not legal advice. If you or a family member alleges custodial torture, our team can help assess the evidence, compensation route and criminal options through criminal case litigation services; contact us through Alpine Law Associates for a case-specific discussion.

People also search for

• Domestic violence law and protection in Nepal
• Sexual harassment law and remedies in Nepal
• Human-rights protection for third-gender and LGBTQ+ people in Nepal
• HIV discrimination and legal protection in Nepal
• Labour rights and legal remedies in Nepal
• Other Nepal criminal and human-rights law guides