Legal and Judicial
Published 19 August 2026 · Last updated 19 August 2026
Dharaut in Nepal (धरौट) is one of the most important mechanisms for obtaining release from detention during a pending criminal case. Under Chapter-7 of the Muluki Faujdari Karyabidhi Sanhita, 2074 (National Criminal Procedure Code, 2074), the court may, depending on the nature of the offence and circumstances of the accused, order detention, take Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee, or proceed with the accused on recognizance.
Sections 67 to 80 of the National Criminal Procedure Code, 2074 are particularly important. The official Nepal Law Commission repository contains the current published text of the Criminal Procedure Code, including Chapter-7 and the prescribed forms relating to Dharaut and Jamanat.
Adalat Lawyers presents this guide based on the statutory framework of the National Criminal Procedure Code, 2074. The purpose is to explain what Dharaut means, when the court may order it, how the amount is determined, what property can be used, what happens if the accused fails to appear, and what remedies are available against an excessive Dharaut order.
Dharaut (धरौट) is security furnished by an accused in connection with release during criminal proceedings.
Under Section 68 of the National Criminal Procedure Code, 2074, except in cases falling under Section 67, the court may take Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee from an accused where there is a reasonable ground for proving the charge and remand the accused on the required terms.
The Code therefore does not treat Dharaut as a completely separate concept from the broader bail system. Dharaut operates within the statutory framework governing detention, bail/bond, guarantee and release.
In practical terms:
Court considers the case → determines whether detention is required → if release is legally available, the court may fix Dharaut/Jamanat/bank guarantee → accused furnishes the required security → court processes release.
However, this should not be misunderstood as meaning that every accused person can obtain release simply by offering money.
The first question is always whether the case falls within the detention provisions of Section 67.
In Nepalese criminal practice, people commonly use the term Thunchek (थुनछेक) for the court's determination concerning detention or release of an accused during the criminal proceedings.
At the Thunchek stage, the court may consider whether:
Therefore, Dharaut is one possible outcome of the Thunchek process; it is not synonymous with every Thunchek order.
This distinction is particularly important in serious criminal cases because Section 67 identifies circumstances in which the court may remand an accused in detention.
Section 67 is the starting point for determining whether Dharaut is available.
Under Section 67(1), where an accused is charged with specified offences and the evidence available at the relevant time shows that the accused appears to be guilty or there is a reasonable basis to believe that the accused is guilty, the court may remand the accused in detention for trial, recording the reason for detention.
The provision covers:
Where the alleged offence carries a sentence of imprisonment for life, Section 67 may apply.
Section 67(1)(b) applies to offences under Schedule-1 or Schedule-2 punishable by imprisonment exceeding three years.
Section 67(1)(c) also covers attempt, abetment, criminal conspiracy or being an accomplice to the offences specified in the relevant clauses.
This means that the exact offence charged and its statutory punishment are fundamental when determining whether the court is dealing with a Section 67 detention case.
Section 67(2) provides additional circumstances where an accused may be remanded in detention.
These include:
These provisions demonstrate that the court may consider not only the alleged offence but also the accused's attendance, residence and previous criminal history.
Section 67(3) provides a special provision for certain categories of accused.
Subject to the statutory limitation concerning offences punishable by imprisonment exceeding ten years, the court may release on Dharaut/Jamanat an accused who is:
Where such circumstances exist, the defence should place the relevant facts and supporting documents before the court.
The statutory limitation must, however, be carefully considered according to the exact offence and punishment.
Section 68. To take Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee from the accused is the principal provision governing Dharaut.
The provision states, in substance, that except in cases falling under Section 67, where there is a reasonable ground for proving the charge against the accused, the court may take:
and keep the accused on the required court date/attendance arrangement.
The Code further provides that a bank guarantee must be unconditional and renewable for the period specified by the court.
This provision is extremely important because it shows that Dharaut is generally considered in cases outside the detention circumstances of Section 67.
Section 68(2) provides that an accused who does not furnish the Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee required under Section 68 shall be remanded in detention.
Therefore, there is a practical two-stage process:
The court determines that release can take place subject to Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee.
The accused must comply with the court's order.
If the required security is not furnished, detention may follow under Section 68(2).
This is why families should understand not only the amount ordered but also the type of security accepted by the court.
No single fixed Dharaut amount applies to every criminal case.
Section 72 requires the court to fix the amount reasonably, taking specified circumstances into account.
This means that two accused persons facing different offences or materially different circumstances may receive different Dharaut amounts.
A lawyer should therefore avoid treating Dharaut as a standard price for release.
The relevant question is:
What amount is reasonable under Section 72 considering the offence and circumstances of this particular accused?
Section 72 is one of the most important provisions for understanding Dharaut amount in Nepal.
The court must consider the relevant statutory factors and fix the amount reasonably.
The Code identifies the following matters.
The court considers the nature and seriousness of the alleged offence.
A serious offence may justify a different security assessment from a less serious allegation.
The court considers the financial status and family condition of the accused or offender.
This is particularly important because the law expressly requires these circumstances to be considered when fixing the amount.
The age and physical condition of the accused may also be relevant.
Where illness or physical condition is material, appropriate medical evidence should be presented.
The court considers whether the accused was previously convicted of an offence and sentenced.
A relevant previous conviction can affect the court's assessment.
The court may consider whether several offences were allegedly committed on the same occasion.
The sentence that may be imposed and the compensation that may have to be borne by the accused are relevant considerations.
The consequences resulting from the alleged offence may be considered.
Whether the accused has pleaded guilty is also included among the statutory considerations.
The law therefore requires a reasoned and reasonable approach to the amount, rather than a purely arbitrary figure.
Yes.
Section 72(2) provides that where a party considers the Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee amount demanded to be lesser or excessive and therefore unreasonable, an application may be made to the appeal-hearing court.
The appellate court may hear the issue and order the amount to be:
This provision can be important where an accused believes that the court has fixed an amount that does not reasonably reflect the statutory factors.
A properly prepared challenge should identify why the amount is unreasonable, rather than merely stating that the accused cannot afford it.
Section 73 provides a separate petition mechanism.
A person dissatisfied with an order concerning:
may make a petition to the court hearing the appeal up to one level, subject to the statutory proviso.
The proviso provides an additional route concerning the legality of a detention order in cases involving offences punishable by life imprisonment or imprisonment for five years or more, as specified by the provision.
Therefore, if the court orders detention or fixes a disputed Dharaut amount, the defence should promptly examine whether a petition under Section 72(2), Section 73, or another appropriate legal remedy is available.
Yes.
Section 70 states that if the Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee initially taken from an accused later appears to be insufficient, the court may demand additional Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee.
If the accused fails to furnish the additional security, the court may remand the accused in detention.
Therefore, the original security arrangement can be reconsidered during the proceedings.
Yes.
Section 71 provides that the court can, during the examination of evidence and regardless of the stage of the proceedings, remand an accused in detention under Section 67 or demand Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee under Section 68.
The fact that the accused was not detained at the beginning does not prevent the court from later taking action under Section 67.
Similarly, the fact that security was not initially demanded does not permanently prevent the court from demanding it later.
This is why bail and Dharaut are not necessarily permanent arrangements throughout the entire criminal case.
Yes, where the statutory circumstances support it.
Section 71(2) provides that if the court obtains reasonable grounds to establish that an accused detained under Section 67 or 68 is not guilty of the offence, the court may, at any stage of the proceedings, hear the matter and order the accused's release from detention.
This means that the evidentiary position can become relevant even after an initial detention order.
A defence lawyer should therefore monitor developments in the evidence rather than assuming that the first Thunchek order determines the accused's position for the entire case.
Yes, subject to the statutory requirements and court order.
Section 74 establishes the process for taking Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee.
The prescribed forms published by the Nepal Law Commission specifically contemplate cash or property being furnished as Dharaut. Schedule-29, corresponding to Section 74(1), includes the prescribed undertaking concerning appearance and forfeiture of the Dharaut if the person does not appear as required.
Where property is used as security, the court must follow the relevant statutory procedure and documentation.
This makes it important to verify:
Yes.
Section 74 contemplates a situation where another person furnishes their property as guarantee for the accused.
The person providing the property must execute the prescribed documentation and accept the statutory consequences.
If the accused fails to appear at the time and place specified by the court, the guarantee may become subject to recovery according to the Code.
Accordingly, a family member or other guarantor should understand that giving property as Jamanat is a legally significant commitment.
It should not be treated as a simple formality.
Section 74 provides that if the value of property furnished as guarantee subsequently decreases for any reason, the person who furnished the guarantee must submit property equal to the decreased value to the court.
This is an important provision that property owners should understand.
The obligation does not necessarily end merely because the property was accepted when the guarantee was originally furnished.
If its value subsequently decreases, the statutory requirement concerning replacement or additional property can arise.
The Code contains prescribed schedules for the relevant deeds.
Schedule-29, related to Section 74(1), contains the form for the person furnishing Dharaut. It records the court's order, the amount or property being furnished and the undertaking to appear at the time specified by the court, with consent to forfeiture up to the amount payable if the person fails to appear.
The Code also contains:
The exact documentation should be completed according to the court's prescribed requirements.
This is one of the most important Dharaut rules.
Under Section 75. Forfeiture of Dharaut, if a person who has furnished Dharaut does not appear before the court on the appointed date, the Dharaut is subject to forfeiture.
Where immovable property has been furnished, the statutory mechanism allows property corresponding to the amount payable to be sold or recovered, with the remaining property returned as provided by law.
Therefore:
Dharaut gives release, but it also creates a legally enforceable appearance obligation.
Missing a court date without addressing the matter properly can have serious consequences.
Yes, subject to the Code.
Section 76 provides for the return of Dharaut and release of Jamanat in specified circumstances.
Where an accused is subsequently remanded in detention in a case filed before the court, the Dharaut or Jamanat furnished before detention is to be released as provided by the provision.
More importantly, where an accused is ultimately acquitted, the Dharaut or Jamanat taken during the proceedings is, except where otherwise provided by the Act, to be returned or released immediately.
This is one reason why the accused and guarantor should retain copies of:
Section 77 addresses prolonged detention.
Where an accused has been detained for trial and the case cannot be adjudicated within one year from the first date fixed for examination of evidence, the case may proceed with the accused released on Dharaut/Jamanat, subject to the statutory exceptions.
The important exception is that the provision does not apply to an accused detained under Section 67 for an offence punishable by:
The court may also continue detention where the statutory circumstances concerning a recidivist apply.
Therefore, Section 77 must always be examined against the exact charge and basis of detention.
Section 78 establishes another important safeguard.
An accused should not be held in detention for a period exceeding the maximum term of imprisonment that could be imposed if the charge were proved, notwithstanding other provisions of the Chapter.
For a detention challenge, the defence should carefully calculate and document:
This can be particularly important in cases involving prolonged criminal proceedings.
Section 79 requires the court to execute a memorandum of order when:
The memorandum must be accompanied by the reason for the order.
For the defence, obtaining and reviewing the actual written order is therefore extremely important.
The reasons recorded by the court can determine what legal remedy may be appropriate.
Section 80 provides that where a person is held in detention under the Act, the competent authority must hold the person in accordance with a detention warrant in the prescribed form.
The warrant must be accompanied by the reason and legal ground for detention and must be based on the detention order made under Chapter-7.
Thus, detention is connected to a formal judicial order and stated legal basis.
For practical purposes, the Dharaut process in Nepal can be understood through the following sequence.
The first step is to identify the precise offence alleged against the accused.
The maximum punishment can determine whether Section 67 is engaged.
The court considers the evidence available at the relevant stage under the applicable statutory framework.
If Section 67 applies, the court may order detention where its statutory requirements are satisfied.
Where Section 67 does not apply, the court may consider Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee where there is a reasonable ground for proving the charge.
The defence should place relevant financial, family, age, health and other circumstances before the court.
The accused or guarantor must comply with the court's order.
The relevant statutory deed must be completed.
Once the required legal and administrative steps are completed, the accused may be released according to the order.
The accused must comply with the appearance obligation to protect the Dharaut/Jamanat from forfeiture.
A strong Dharaut argument should be based on the factors expressly identified by Section 72.
The defence may present evidence concerning:
Demonstrate a genuine and permanent connection to Nepal where relevant.
Explain the accused's family circumstances.
Provide a realistic picture of the accused's financial capacity.
Where relevant, submit medical or age documentation.
Accurately explain previous convictions or the absence of relevant previous convictions.
Address the seriousness and actual circumstances of the alleged offence.
Explain the statutory punishment relevant to the charge.
Where the accused has complied with previous court orders, this may be relevant to the overall assessment.
The purpose is to assist the court in determining a reasonable amount within the statutory framework.
If the court has fixed Dharaut and the accused cannot furnish it, the problem should be addressed immediately.
Section 68(2) states that an accused who fails to furnish the required security may be remanded in detention.
Depending on the circumstances, the defence may examine whether:
The appropriate remedy depends on the exact order.
TermGeneral MeaningDharaut (धरौट)Security furnished for release subject to the court's orderJamanat (जमानत)Guarantee/security arrangement for the accusedBank GuaranteeBank-backed security subject to the statutory and court requirementsRecognizanceAppearance undertaking under Section 69 in appropriate casesThunchek (थुनछेक)Court's determination concerning detention/release during proceedingsThuna (थुना)Detention/custody
The precise legal effect always depends on the court order and applicable statutory provision.
A Dharaut hearing can directly affect an accused person's liberty.
A lawyer should not approach the matter merely by asking:
“How much money can we deposit?”
The more important questions are:
At Adalat Lawyers, these questions form part of a case-specific criminal litigation assessment.
The objective is to present the court with a structured legal basis for release and, where appropriate, to challenge detention or an unreasonable security amount.
Dharaut (धरौट) is security furnished by an accused for release during criminal proceedings where the court permits release subject to Dharaut. Section 68 of the National Criminal Procedure Code, 2074 provides for Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee in cases outside the Section 67 detention framework.
There is no fixed Dharaut amount for every criminal case. Under Section 72, the court must fix the amount reasonably after considering factors including the nature and gravity of the offence, financial and family condition, age and physical condition, previous conviction, possible sentence, compensation and consequences of the offence.
No. Section 67 identifies circumstances where an accused may be remanded in detention, particularly for specified serious offences and other statutory circumstances. Section 68 applies to cases outside Section 67 where the statutory requirements for Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee are satisfied.
If the court requires Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee and the accused fails to furnish it, Section 68(2) provides for detention. Depending on the circumstances, the defence may consider challenging an excessive amount under Section 72(2), petitioning under Section 73 or seeking another legally available arrangement.
Yes, subject to the court's requirements. Section 74 provides the statutory framework for security and the prescribed deeds contemplate property being furnished as Dharaut or Jamanat. The court must be satisfied with the security and the relevant documentation must be completed.
Yes. Section 74 contemplates another person furnishing their property as guarantee for an accused. However, the guarantor may face recovery consequences if the accused fails to appear as required. Anyone furnishing property should therefore understand the legal commitment before signing the deed.
Yes, potentially. Section 72(2) permits a party to approach the appeal-hearing court where the amount of Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee is considered excessive or otherwise unreasonable. The appellate court may alter or modify the amount.
Yes. Section 70 allows the court to demand additional Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee if the original security subsequently appears insufficient. Failure to provide the additional security may result in detention.
Under Section 75, Dharaut may be forfeited if the person who furnished it fails to appear before the court on the appointed date. Where immovable property was furnished, the statutory recovery and sale provisions may apply to the amount payable.
A criminal lawyer can examine the charge, punishment, evidence and detention basis; prepare the Thunchek/Dharaut argument; present the Section 72 factors; arrange or challenge the proposed security; advise on property Jamanat or bank guarantee; and consider an appropriate petition where detention or the Dharaut amount is legally challengeable.
Dharaut in Nepal is governed principally by the detention and bail framework contained in Chapter-7 of the National Criminal Procedure Code, 2074.
The most important provisions are:
The key point is that Dharaut is not a fixed amount and is not automatically available in every criminal case. The court first considers the applicable statutory framework, particularly whether the case falls under Section 67. Where Section 68 applies, the court may take Dharaut, Jamanat or bank guarantee, and Section 72 provides the factors for fixing the amount reasonably.
The Nepal Law Commission's official publication of the National Criminal Procedure Code also contains the prescribed forms concerning Dharaut and Jamanat, including Schedule-29 relating to Dharaut and the appearance/forfeiture undertaking.
For an accused facing a Thunchek, Dharaut or Jamanat hearing, the most effective approach is to analyze the exact charge, statutory punishment, evidence, personal circumstances and procedural history before deciding the appropriate legal strategy.
Adalat Lawyers can assist with criminal litigation matters involving Dharaut, Jamanat, Thunchek, detention, bail/bond, bank guarantee, bail-amount challenges and related appellate proceedings in Nepal.
Subscribe for a monthly briefing on Nepal's corporate law, regulatory developments, and firm insights.
Download a PDF copy of this publication to read offline or share with colleagues.
Download PDFInsights
