KATHMANDU, Jan 11: Gaushala 26 has lodged a complaint with the Cyber Bureau of Nepal Police against disclosing her identity as a victim in the cricketer Sandeep Lamichhane rape case.

On January 10, Kathmandu District Court sentenced cricketer Sandeep Lamichhane to eight years in imprisonment in connection with a rape case. The bench also ordered the cricketer to pay a fine of Rs 300,000 and to pay Rs 200,000 compensation to the victim for psychological distress. After the Kathmandu District Court provided verdict on cricketer Lamichhane case, efforts were made to reveal the identity of Gaushala 26.

The court and the police have kept the identity of the victim confidential and given a symbolic name of the victim stating Gaushala 26 in their orders, judgments and reports.

Gaushala 26 has filed a complaint to investigate two charges mentioning the names of six social media pages.

Many fans of Lamichhane including one Diwas Sapkota, who claims to be Chitwan district member of Rastriya Swatantra Party (RSP), Abhishek Gharti Magar, Govinda Bishwokarma, Barsha Tamang and others have posted photos of Gaushala 26 on the social media identifying her to be the victim raped by Lamichhane.

Alleging a violation of her right to privacy and dignity, Gaushala 26 accused these individuals of engaging in internet-related crimes. The complaint was filed at Cyber Bureau, with SP Pashupati Kumar Ray confirming an ongoing investigation into the matter.

Meanwhile, RSP has taken action against one of its cadres for his involvement in publicizing Gaushala 26 through social media. The party, in a Facebook statement, stated a lack of sensitivity in the use of social media as the reason for the suspension.

Gaushala 26 filed a complaint against Individual Privacy and Prestige (including section 294, section 298 of the National Criminal Code, 2074) and computer-related offenses (including section 47 of the Electronic Transactions Act, 2063).

Section 294(1) of the National Criminal Code, 2074 about prohibition of divulging confidential matter states that no person shall divulge another person's confidential matter, which he or she comes to know from such person in the course of his or her professional work, except where such divulgence is compelled by law or permitted by such person.

Likewise, section 294(2) mentions that a person who commits the offense referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding ten thousand rupees or both the sentences.

Similarly, section 298(1) about prohibition of breaching privacy through electronic means states that no person shall obtain, in an unauthorized manner, a notice, information and correspondence lying in or to be transmitted from any electronic means or breach privacy thereof, or transfer, or cause to be transferred, the same to another person in an unauthorized manner. Section 298(1) states that a person who commits, or causes to be committed, the offense referred to in sub-section (1) shall be liable to a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding two years or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand rupees or both the sentences.

Spokesperson at the Office of the Attorney General Surya Raj Dahal said, “Those revealing identity of the victim can be jailed as per different clauses of the Crime Victim Protection Act, 2075, the Privacy Act and the Electronic Transaction Act, 2063.”

He said that the Section 6 of the Crime Victim Protection Act guarantees right to privacy of the victims of rape, incest, human trafficking, sexual harassment, and other criminal offenses as prescribed by the Government of Nepal by publishing a notice in the Nepal Gazette.

Similarly, section 3(4) of the Privacy Act, mentioned that no person shall publish, or cause to be published, any matters related to privacy of body and personal life of person so as to affect, inflict or insult in the personal life of such a person, by writing, speaking, publishing or using electronic means or any other manner.

Likewise, Section 47(1) of the Electronic Transactions Act, about publication of illegal materials in electronic form states that if any person publishes or displays any material in the electronic media including computer, internet which are prohibited to publish or display by the prevailing law or which may be contrary to the public morality or decent behavior or any types of materials which may spread hate or jealousy against anyone or which may jeopardize the harmonious relations subsisting among the peoples of various castes, tribes and communities shall be liable to the punishment with the fine not exceeding Rs 1,000 or with the imprisonment not exceeding five years or with both.

Section 47(2) states that if any person commits an offense referred to in Sub-section (1) time to time he/she shall be liable to the punishment for each time with one and one half percent of the punishment of the previous punishment.

A Supreme Court (SC) verdict in 2064 explained that disclosing the identity of a victim whose confidentiality is supposed to be maintained is an insult to the victim.

Following the verdict of Kathmandu District Court, CAN suspended cricketer Lamichhane.

According to CAN, Lamichhane has been suspended from participating in any domestic or international competition.

A statement issued by the CAN on Thursday, reads, “... Sandeep Lamichhane, the former captain of the national team, has been convicted in the rape case, and on the basis of the order of the honorable court, Sandeep Lamichhane has been banned from any kind of domestic and international cricket activities. We would like to inform you that he has been suspended.”

The Kathmandu District Court, however, ruled that the victim girl nicknamed Gaushala 26 had reached 18 years of age. Even though the victim was an adult, the court found Lamichhane guilty, stating that rape has been proven. The court held that Lamichhane had committed the offense under Section 219 (1, 2, and 3) (e) of the Civil Code 2074, as the act was not consensual.

But Sandeep's lawyer Saroj Krishna Ghimire said, “He is going to appeal to the High Court for justice, insisting that Lamichhane is not found guilty on any basis, reason, or evidence.”

After debating in the Kathmandu District Court on Wednesday in favor of setting a minimum sentence for Lamichhane, he also argued that since Lamichhane himself is presenting the evidence that he is innocent, they have the right to appeal in the High Court demanding justice.

However, the court has provided him the privilege to fight the case at the high court without the need for him to stay in prison.

Ghimire made it clear that they participated in the debate regarding the punishment, demanding a lesser sentence, as they had to accept the decision of the respected district court in this regard. He said “Considering Lamichhane's personality, the impact he has had on the sports, his good character, and his social responsibility, the punishment should be the minimum.”

On September 6, a 17-year-old girl complained to Gaushala Police Station, accusing Lamichhane of raping her in a hotel room in Sinamangal.

 
• Cyber_Bureau
 
• rape_case
 
• privacy