Judicial Responses to the Welfare of women (Before 2047)

Meera Dhungana v Office of Prime Minister and Council of Ministers and Others (2007) Gender discrimination, Property and
inheritance rights

The petitioner filed to amend a provision in pension payments by the Nepalese Army that withheld payments from married
daughters. The Court ruled to invalidate this measure based on the grounds that pension payments to children were stopped at
18 years, before the legal age of marriage, making it obsolete. However, the Court also acknowledged that this provision was
contrary to Article 11 of the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal which guarantees equal rights to all, in particular highlighting
that equality is meant in practical terms sometimes necessitating positive discrimination. By interpreting Article 11 of the
Constitution to include positive discrimination, this case opens the door to proactive human rights defense measures.

Sapana Pradhan Malla v Office of Prime Minister and Council of Minister and Others (2007) Gender discrimination

The Forum for Women, Law and Development in Nepal brought a petition to the Supreme Court filing for an exhaustive law
ensuring privacy for vulnerable groups; particularly women, children, and persons living with HIV/AIDS. The Court ruled that
enforcing the right to privacy for these and other sensitive parties in legal proceedings is inextricable from other Constitutional
rights, including life and dignity, and vital to ensuring justice. Therefore, the Court ordered a directive for a law to be passed
ensuring the right to privacy and set forth detailed guidelines for maintaining privacy to be followed in the interim. This ruling
guarantees a crucial right to victims of gender violence and other abuses, opening a window for them to seek justice without
fearing further injury from social stigma, discrimination, or retaliation. Furthermore, the ruling acknowledges that certain
Constitutional rights much be positively enforced through legal codes.

Achyut Prasad Kharel v. Office of Prime Minister and Council of Ministers and Others (2008) Gender discrimination

A petition to require consent from the woman’s husband in a law in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Nepal allowing women
to have an abortion on fetuses of less than 12 weeks cited CEDAW conventions mandating equality between men and women
on matters relating to family planning. The Court dismissed the petition emphasizing that CEDAW is intended to promote and
protect women’s rights and to consider the wording of equality in such absolute terms would, in fact, be contrary to this original
intent. With this ruling, the Supreme Court of Nepal shows remarkable dedication to protecting and empowering women as the
primary goal in interpreting legal conventions on women’s rights.

Jit Kumari Pangeni (Neupane) and Others v. Prime Ministers and Council of Ministers and Others (2008) Domestic and
intimate partner violence, Gender discrimination, Sexual violence and rape

A woman who had been a repeated victim of marital rape petitioned the Supreme Court of Nepal to make sentencing for
marital rape on par with sentencing for other types of rape. The Court found that punishing marital rape differently from other
forms of rape violated equal rights provisions in the Interim Constitution and international law, especially considering that prior
sentencing guidelines of three to six months put the victim in danger of repeated violence and rape. Although the Court did not
have the power to change sentencing terms on existing offences, it directed the legislative authorities to change sentencing
terms for marital rape, showing recognition of the gravity of rape as a violation of rights and dignity while also exhibiting a
proactive will to reform legal codes in the name of equality.

Tek Tamrakar and Others v. HMG Cabinet Secretariat and Others (2005)Gender discrimination

Women of Badi origin, an ethnic minority subjected to social and economic exclusion in Nepal, are often forced into prostitution
and become single mothers. The petition sought to rectify the common practice of denying citizenship and other rights to Badi
children when the father cannot be found. The Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to deny citizenship on such claims and,
furthermore, amended a law that gave men precedence over women in birth and death registrations. Finally, in light of the
range of abuses suffered by the Badi, the Court ordered a study on problems faced by the Badi community directed that all
recommendations produced be implemented. This case is remarkable not only in recognizing the impacts of ethnic and gender
discrimination but also in going beyond the petitioners request to proactively address the wider range of related rights abuses
of considering the practical well-being and rights of the child before implementing human rights reforms.