Khotang bar urges critics of an acquittal to use appeals, not public attacks on the judge
After protests over a district court acquittal in a murder case, the local unit of the Nepal Bar Association said disagreement with judgments should rest on facts and law.
In this article
The Khotang unit of the Nepal Bar Association has objected to public criticism of the Khotang District Court and its judge following an acquittal in a murder case. In a statement issued on 23 September (7 Asoj 2083 BS), district chair Kul Prasad Sharma Phuyal asked that disagreement with judicial decisions be expressed “only on the basis of facts and law”.
Background
On 21 September (5 Asoj), a single bench of District Judge Phanindra Prasad Parajuli acquitted three defendants accused of murdering a young woman. According to Sankalpa Khabar, a minor had earlier been convicted in connection with the same incident. After the judgment, the victim’s family and relatives protested and chanted slogans in the court premises.
The same report quotes the chief of the District Police Office, Khotang, as saying the charges against the three, who had been arrested and investigated following a High Court order, were not proved. This is a district court judgment and can be appealed to the High Court under the law.
What the bar said
The statement reminds anyone dissatisfied with a judgment that legal remedies such as appeal, review and petition are available. It says that questioning the honour, reputation, character or integrity of a court or judge, making insulting remarks or running unnecessary publicity campaigns damages judicial independence, impartiality and public trust.
The bar did not question the family’s grief or their right to seek justice. Its point is about the manner of dissent: taking facts and evidence to a higher court rather than attacking a judge’s character in the street or in public places.
Why it matters
Dissatisfaction among victims’ families is understandable when a serious criminal case ends in acquittal. But in a criminal case the prosecution must prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt. Where the evidence falls short, the court acquits, and that decision can be reviewed on appeal. It has not been made public whether the state will appeal.
Sources
Out of respect for the privacy and dignity of the victim and of those acquitted, we have not named them. This report currently relies on a single outlet and will be updated if the parties give an official position or further details emerge.
Other reporting
- Bar urges people not to comment against courts and judges — Sankalpa Khabar, 23 September 2026
