Kenneth Joseph Coombs v Nepal Government NKP 2078

Decision no: 10772

Case: Human Trafficking and Child Sexual Abuse

Fact of the case:

The defendant Kenneth Joseph Coombs, an American citizen with the assistance of Buddha Putuwar
sexually abused a child of age 10-12 years Changed name to Kathmandu 26 C.I.B.161 4/5 times offering
the minor some money and food. Buddha Putuwar took the victim to hotel Yambu via his motorbike
where Kenneth was staying, saying the foreigner would give him money and food. After that, Kenneth
took off all the clothes of the victim 26 CIB 161, touched his body, played with victim’s penis by his
hands and mouth, and then made the victim to eat and play with his penis. Putuwar used to take half of
the money from the child given by the defendant.

The Hotel confirmed after 1/2 day staying at the hotel, Buddha Putuwar started bringing 2/3 different
children to the hotel room, approximately 12/15 years old.

While writing the complaint on 23/05/2073 of three child Kathmandu 26 C.I.B.159, Kathmandu 26
C.I.B.160, and Kathmandu 26 C.I.B.161, five other children related to the incident had come to the CIB
for a complaint through the police.

Evidence used:

 The laptop and the camera obtained from Kenneth’s room were tested using Forensic Tool Kit
(FTK) technology and two materials containing nude images of children and other documents
were recovered.

Principle applied:

Charge Sheet:

The Defendants are charged on committing an offense under Sections 3 and 4(2)(b) of the Human
Trafficking and Transportation(Control) Act, 2064 and offence under no.1 and no.9a of Muluki Ain
chapter on Rape. The defendants should be punished as per 15(1)(e)(2) of the Human Trafficking and
Transportation(Control) Act, 2064 and the victim shall be compensated as per section 17 of the very act.
For sexually abusing child, the defendants shall be punished as per no.9A and no.3(2) of muluki ain and
victim should be compensated as per no.9a of the act.

Defendant claim:

The defendant denied all the charges made against him. He told he received marijuana from the child
and gave him money for marijuana, not for doing any improper sexual conduct with the boy. He pleaded
to have not been involved in any such sexual misconduct helped by giving some money and food for 17
days as the street children repeatedly asked him for money and food in his Nepal visit.
The defendant argued if he had committed any child sexual abuse, the children would have filed a
complaint with the police on the first day but only after the police took the children in control, the police
forcefully filed a complaint against him. The children came to the hotel by themselves, was not brought
by Putuwar. The naked photos were taken by the children by themselves when he was out.

Decision:

 Kathmandu District Court

Kenneth is convicted under no.9a of muluki ani, chapter on rape for abusing child sexually of age
less than 16. He is imprisoned for total 9 years, 8 years under no.3(2) and additional 1 year
under no.9a of muluki ain. Compensation of Rs.50000 is too inflicted.
Budha putuwar is sentenced to double the 2 (two) years i.e. 4 (four) years imprisonment as the
victim is under the age of sixteen as per no.4 of muluki ain under same chapter.

 High Court, Patan

Same , sadar

 Supreme Court

Analysis:

 साथै प्रतिवादीहरू Kenneth Joseph Coombs र लुच्चे गणेश भन्ने बुद्ध पुतुवारलाई बाल यौन
दुराचारको कसुरमा सजाय भइसके को अवस्थामा एकै कार्य र घटनाका लागि एकभन्दा बढी कसुर कायम
गरी सजाय गर्न दोहोरो खतराको सिद्धान्तविपरीत हुने देखिँदा प्रतिवादीहरूले यी पीडितलाई किनबेच
गर्ने उद्देश्य नभई जबरजस्ती करणीको महलअनुसारको उद्देश्य देखिँदा निज प्रतिवादीहरूलाई मानव
बेचबिखन तथा ओसारपसार (नियन्त्रण) ऐन, २०६४ को दफा ३ र ४(२)(ख) बमोजिमको कसुरमा सोही
ऐनको दफा १५(१)(ङ) (२) अनुसार सजाय गरिपाउँ भन्ने अभियोग दाबी पुग्न नसके कोले सफाइ पाउने
 मलाई पक्राउ गर्दा तयार गरिएको खानतलासी बरामदी मुचुल्कामा मलाई सही दस्तखत गर्नभन्दा मैले I
can not understand Nepali उल्लेख गरेँ । प्रहरीहरूले हामीलाई कानूनी तवरले तयार गरेको
लिखतमा यस्तो लेख्ने भन्ने एक किसिमको कु ण्ठाको सिर्जना भयो
 मुद्दा दोहोर्‍याई हेर्न अनुमति प्रदान गर्दा दफा २२५ को शीर्षकमा रहेको “बाल यौन दुरूपयोग”
लेखिनुपर्नेमा “बाल यौन दुराचार” लेखिएको देखिन्छ । सोही कारण दुराचार र दुरूपयोग पर्यायवाची शब्द
रहेको अर्थ निकाली कसुरको प्रकृ ति र सजायको व्यवस्थाबारेको कानूनी व्यवस्थाको बुझाइमा धेरै ठुलो
फरक पर्न गएको देखिन्छ । यी दुई शब्दको उल्लिखित शब्दार्थबाट दुरूपयोगको तुलनामा दुराचारलाई धेरै
नै गम्भीर र अस्वीकार्य आचरण व्यवहार मानिन्छ भन्ने स्पष्ट हुन्छ
 तर यस सम्बन्धमा अध्ययन गरी हेर्दा बाल यौन दुराचारीलाई पिडोफाइल भन्न मिल्ने देखिए पनि सबै
पिडोफाइल बाल यौन दुराचारी नहुन पनि सक्ने भएकाले बाल यौन दुराचार (Child sexual abuse) र
पिडोफाइल (Pedophile) का बिचमा के कस्तो अवस्थामा समान अवस्था र के कस्तो अवस्थामा
भिन्नता छ भन्ने बारेमा हेर्दा सबै पिडोफाइललाई बाल यौन दुराचारको कसुरदार मान्न नसकिए पनि सबै
बाल यौन दुराचारीलाई पिडोफाइल मान्न सक्ने देखिन्छ ।
 Prakaran 18 samma ho yo, padhiyechha tyaha samma, prakaran 19 dekhi padha hai