Nepal's First Constitution: The Muluki Ain Explained

Lucas: If you've been stepping into history with us episode by episode through these conversations about South Asia, you know we’ve spent a lot of time mapping the physical borders of Nepal—how Prithvi Narayan Shah stitched together those disparate valleys and hill states. Luna: And how he tried to hold them together against outside powers. Lucas: Exactly. But holding territory is one thing; governing it is another. For decades after the unification, the Kathmandu Valley operated like a chaotic bazaar of local customs, where a merchant in Patan might follow entirely different rules than a farmer in Gorkha or a trader in Limbuwan. Luna: So there was no real national standard? Lucas: Not really. There were religious texts and old Hindu scriptures, sure, but day-to-day justice was messy, localized, and often arbitrary. It wasn’t until the mid-19th century that a king and his ministers decided they needed a single book of laws to bind the kingdom together. Luna: That sounds like a massive undertaking. Lucas: It was. And the man most associated with laying the intellectual groundwork for it was actually Bhimsen Thapa, the powerful prime minister who dominated politics for nearly two decades before his dramatic fall from grace. Luna: The same Bhimsen Thapa who orchestrated the Kot Massacre? Lucas: Yes, though he didn’t carry out the massacre himself—that came later—but his rise was fueled by the very factional violence that would eventually destroy him. He understood that to rule effectively, he needed to centralize power, and centralized power requires standardized law. Luna: Did he manage to write it? Lucas: He started the process, gathering scholars and judges to draft preliminary codes, but political intrigue got in the way. He was executed in 1839, and for years afterward, the Thapa dynasty collapsed while the Pande faction scrambled to keep the government running. Luna: So who finally finished the job? Lucas: By 1854, the dust had settled enough for King Surendra Bikram Shah to officially promulgate the Muluki Ain. It was a sprawling document, written in Sanskrit and then translated into Newari and Nepali, designed to cover everything from inheritance and marriage to theft and murder. Luna: How did it actually organize society? Lucas: It rigidly codified the caste system into law. Unlike previous eras where caste status could sometimes be fluid based on wealth or local custom, the Muluki Ain assigned every person a specific legal value based on their birth. If you committed a crime, your punishment depended entirely on who the victim was. Luna: That sounds incredibly harsh. Lucas: It was. A high-caste Brahmin who killed a lower-caste person might face a relatively light fine or minor corporal punishment, while a lower-caste person who harmed a high-caste individual could face execution or exile. The law literally put a price tag on human life based on hierarchy. Luna: Did anyone try to challenge that structure? Lucas: Most people had no choice but to live within it, but it created deep resentments. It also complicated matters for the new Gurkha soldiers fighting abroad, who were expected to adhere to these strict domestic laws even while serving in the British Indian Army. Luna: It feels like a tool for control more than justice. Lucas: Precisely. The monarchy and the ruling elites used it to ensure stability. By making the caste hierarchy legally binding, they prevented social mobility that might threaten their authority. It was a way to freeze society in place so the state could manage it more easily. Luna: I wonder how long that system lasted. Lucas: The Muluki Ain remained the foundation of Nepali law for nearly a century. It wasn’t until the democratic movements of the mid-20th century that significant changes began to chip away at its most discriminatory provisions. Lucas: Quick honest thing — a handful of listeners chip in monthly through buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo, and that's literally what funds making this many of these. Luna: Yeah, it helps keep the research going without the ads. Lucas: That’s right, buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo — that's F. E. X. I. N. G. O. It really makes a difference for a small team like ours. Luna: Thanks for supporting the show if you can. Lucas: Back to the legal code, though. One of the most interesting aspects of the Muluki Ain was how it handled property disputes, especially regarding land ownership in the newly conquered territories. Luna: Land was always contentious. Lucas: Always. The code introduced complex rules about joint family ownership versus individual holdings. It tried to balance traditional communal practices with the state’s need to tax individuals directly, which led to a lot of litigation in the early courts. Luna: So families would fight over who owned what? Lucas: Constantly. You’d have cousins suing each other over inherited fields, or widows trying to claim rights to their husband’s estate against male relatives who wanted to take it back. The courts were clogged with these domestic squabbles. Luna: It seems like the law was more about keeping the peace than fairness. Lucas: In many ways, yes. Stability was the primary goal. As long as the hierarchy was respected and property disputes were resolved quickly, the state was happy. Social justice was not really on the agenda. Luna: Did the British observers comment on it? Lucas: They did. Brian Houghton Hodgson, who lived in Kathmandu as a resident for many years, wrote extensively about the absurdity of some of the punishments. He found the severity of penalties for minor offenses shocking by European standards. Luna: Did that influence any reforms? Lucas: Not immediately. The Ranas, who took power shortly after the Muluki Ain was enacted, preferred to keep the existing structures intact because they benefited from them. It wasn’t until much later that external pressure began to force changes. Luna: It’s crazy to think about how deeply law shapes culture. Lucas: It does. The Muluki Ain didn’t just regulate behavior; it shaped how Nepalis viewed themselves and each other for generations. Those social scars are still visible today, even as the country moves toward a more modern legal framework. Luna: I guess laws leave a longer footprint than kings. Lucas: They certainly do. And understanding that legal foundation helps explain why Nepal’s transition to democracy has been such a complex, ongoing struggle rather than a simple event. Luna: Something to keep in mind next time we hear about political unrest there. Lucas: Exactly. It’s never just about the current headline; it’s about the layers of history underneath.