Criminal Law Case: Bhuwane Basnet Kshetri vs. His Majesty’s Government of Nepal, NKP 2031, No. 3, DN: 812
Case: Homicide/Murder(Actus Reus)
Petitioner: Bhuwane Basnet Kshetri
Opponent: His Majesty’s Government on behalf of Harke Damai
Decision No: 812
This case is related to murder/homicide & Actus Reus.
Fact of the case:
Harke Damai’s daughter, Lalmati Damini, had a close relationship with Bhuwane Basnet. Witnesses stated that they had a sexual relationship, and it was believed that Lalmati became pregnant because of him. It was also said that Lalmati confronted Bhuwane about pregnancy on 2024/06/19, and they planned to run away tomorrow to India together. This conversation was reportedly heard by Panmati and Juna Damini.
On the night of 2024/06/20, Lalmati left her home and never returned. On the same date, Bhuwane was also not at home and returned tomorrow on 2024/06/21, creating suspicious situation. Based on this, suspicion arose that Bhuwane killed Lalmati and threw her body into the Karnali River. So Harke Damai, father of missing Lalmati, filed FIR accusing Bhuwane Basnet.
However, no dead body was ever found. There were no eyewitnesses to the alleged murder. Most of the statements from witnesses were based on suspicion or things they had heard. Even the main complainant (her father) mentioned that he had seen dreams in which his daughter said she was thrown into the river.
Legal Issue:
Can a person be convicted of murder based only on suspicion, assumptions, and circumstantial evidence, without clear proof that the crime actually happened?
Decision of Courts:
Dailekh Districts Court:
District Court found Bhuwane guilty. It concluded that he had a relationship with Lalmati, she was likely pregnant, and her disappearance along with his absence pointed toward his involvement. The court decided that he killed her to hide the pregnancy and sentenced him to life imprisonment with confiscation of property.
Bheri Zonal Court:
Bhuwane Basnet Kshetri appealed to Zonal Court and Court agreed with the District Court Decision. It held that the circumstances, local statements, and Bhuwane’s situation at the time created strong suspicion against him. Therefore, it upheld the earlier decision and rejected the appeal.
Supreme Court:
Supreme Court overturned previous decisions. It stated that there was no clear proof that murder even happened. It held that:
- No body was found,
- No eyewitness existed,
- No strong direct evidence,
- And all evidence was based only on suspicion and assumptions.
Court emphasized that when it is doubtful whether a crime even occurred, a person cannot be punished. Therefore, Bhuwane was acquitted and ordered to be released.
Principle Established:
In this case, “If there is doubt about whether the crime even happened, the accused must be given the benefit of the doubt and acquitted.”
“If there is doubt about whether a crime has actually occurred, a person cannot be punished based only on suspicion or weak circumstantial evidence. A conviction requires clear, reliable, and strong proof.”
