ABSTRACT
This article examines the doctrinal relationship between pro tanto repeal, the principle of lex
mitior, and the constitutional prohibition against retrospective criminal liability within the
Nepalese legal system. For the purpose of this article, the recent amendment to section 17 of
the Prevention of Corruption Act, 2059, with particular focus on the removal of liability for
negligent misappropriation and its implications for the maintainability of criminal charges,
interrogating whether the legislative shift to the more stricter intent based liability
substituting negligent liability pursuant to pro tanto repeal, awakens the principle of lex
mitior. The study adopts a doctrinal research methodology, grounded in the systematic
analysis of primary legal sources, including statutory provisions and judicial precedents,
supplemented by secondary materials such as scholarly literature and comparative legal
frameworks. The study further contends that the Nepalese judiciary, although not expressly
using the terminology of lex mitior, implicitly recognizes the doctrine through constitutional
interpretation and statutory construction. The article concludes that prosecutions based
exclusively upon repealed negligent liability under Section 17 should not survive after the
legislative amendment, as continuation would conflict with contemporary standards of
culpability, constitutional legality, and the evolving doctrine of fair criminal responsibility.
Keywords- pro tanto repeal; lex mitior; liability imposition; Prevention of Corruption Act,
Section 17 amendment; legal analysis
The author is a student at Global School of Law, Purbanchal University, Mid Baneshwor, Kathmandu, Nepal.
