Former Inspector General of Nepal Police (IGP) Chandra Kuber Khapung has submitted his response to the Supreme Court, firmly defending the police actions during the Gen-Z movement and arguing that no police personnel should face punishment for their conduct during the tumultuous days of September 8 and 9.
Khapung, who recently retired on November 13, filed his reply following a writ petition filed by Makbul Miya of Arghakhanchi and others. The petitioners named Khapung and others as defendants, demanding action be taken over the alleged excessive force used by the police. The Supreme Court had previously ordered Khapung and the other defendants to submit their clarifications within 15 days of the initial hearing.
Actions taken in 'good faith'
In his response, Khapung asserts that the actions taken by the Nepal Police on September 8 and 9 were carried out "honestly" with the intention of maintaining law and order and protecting government and public property as per prevailing laws.
"The work done with honesty by the Nepal Police on September 8 and 9, aimed at maintaining law and order and protecting government and public property as per the prevailing laws, should not result in punishment for any police personnel," Khapung stated in his defense.
Citing Section 37 of the Police Act, 2012, which stipulates that an officer is not liable if an act is carried out in "good faith" while performing their duty, he argued that any action taken in good faith—regardless of the presence or absence of negligence—should be considered to have been done with good intent.
Shifting responsibility and dismissal plea
Khapung also pointed out that the responsibility for maintaining law and order at the district level lies primarily with the Chief District Officer (CDO) under Section 6 of the Local Administration Act, 2028, and Rules 68 and 70 of the Police Regulations, 2071. He claimed that the role of the Inspector General of Police in this regard is not outlined in the prevailing acts or regulations, dismissing the petitioners' allegation of his failure to perform his constitutional duty as "imaginary and subjective."
He further requested the Supreme Court to dismiss the writ petition outright, stating that it is based merely on "subjective and emotional issues" and is not maintainable, especially as the petitioners also sought an order for his arrest, which he argued is not within the ambit of the court's extraordinary jurisdiction for a writ petition.
Regarding the incidents of September 8 and 9, the Nepal Government has already formed a high-level inquiry commission. Khapung stated that since the commission is currently investigating the matter, it would be inappropriate for him to comment further, and that any legal action would be based on the commission's conclusions.
The Gen-Z uprising
The Gen-Z movement started as a peaceful protest, but quickly escalated after Khapung assumed office on September 4. On September 8, the situation turned violent, leading to police firing that resulted in the deaths of 19 people and injuries to hundreds.
The following day saw a major breakdown of law and order, with incidents of vandalism and arson targeting key government structures, including the Parliament, Singha Durbar, the Supreme Court, Sheetal Niwas, and Baluwatar. The total death toll from the movement, including police and protestors killed by arson, reached 76.
The Supreme Court confirmed that it is awaiting the responses of other defendants named in the petition before proceeding with further hearings.
.
