Official photograph of Rt. Hon'ble Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma

Rt. Hon'ble Chief Justice · सम्माननीय प्रधान न्यायाधीश

Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma

डा. मनोजकुमार शर्मा

Appointed 19 April 2019 (2076-01-06 BS)
7 years 6 months of service · Chief Justice since 19 May 2026

Cases heard and decided

6,499
cases decided
842
median days to decision
37,406
cases listed
863
cases decided per year

Benches including Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma, from the date of appointment to 30 October 2026 (2083-07-13 BS). Cases decided: by a judgment or final order. Median days to decision: half of the cases took less time from registration, half took more (about 2 years 3 months). Cases listed: listed for hearing at least once. Per year: an average over the length of service. Definitions.

Biography

Chief Justice of Nepal since
19 May 2026 (2083-02-05 BS)
Date of birth
18 June 1970 (2027-03-04 BS)
Age
56 years
Mandatory retirement
18 May 2032 (2089-02-05 BS)
At the end of the six-year term of office of the Chief Justice (Constitution of Nepal, Article 129(4)). He reaches 65 years of age on 18 June 2035.
Entered the judicial service (न्याय सेवा प्रवेश)
10 June 2013 (2070-02-27 BS)

Career

  • Advocate from 1995; councillor of the Supreme Court Bar Association 1998–2000 and executive member in 2010
  • Additional Judge, Appellate Court, Butwal and Patan, June 2013 – December 2015
  • Justice of the Supreme Court from 19 April 2019
  • Member (2023–2024), then Chairperson (2024–2026), of the Access to Justice Commission
  • Chief Justice of Nepal from 19 May 2026

Education

B.L., Nepal Law Campus, Tribhuvan University (1994); LL.M., University of Pune (2004); doctorate in labour law, Tribhuvan University (2018)

Source: Supreme Court of Nepal: list of justices (name and photograph); curriculum vitae; Annual Report 2081/82, Annex 97, page 291 (dates of appointment and of entry into the judicial service). Checked on 2 November 2026 (2083-07-16 BS). The date of mandatory retirement is calculated from the date of birth published by the court.

Time to decision compared with all benches

Time to decision is the number of days from a case's registration at the Supreme Court to its judgment or final order. The median is the middle value: half of the cases took less time and half took more. Each bar shows the middle half of cases decided; the mark on the bar is the median.

Benches including this justice842 days
All benches, same period777 days
05001,0001,5002,000days

For benches including this justice, the middle half of cases were decided between 276 and 1,873 days after registration. For all benches over the same period, the median was 777 days and the middle half took between 243 and 1,754 days.

Time to decision depends heavily on the kinds of cases a bench is assigned, which the justices do not choose, and on how long those cases had already been pending.

Year by year

Cases decided each year

Cases decided each year by benches including Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar SharmaBars show the number of cases decided in each complete Nepali fiscal year.05001,0001,5002,0002076/77: 485 cases decided2077/78: 175 cases decided2078/79: 540 cases decided2079/80: 1,457 cases decided2080/81: 1,661 cases decided2081/82: 1,322 cases decided2082/83: 648 cases decided2076/772077/782078/792079/802080/812081/822082/83

Median time to decision each year

Benches including this justiceAll benches
Median time to decision each year, in days: benches including Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma, and all benchesLines show the median number of days from registration to decision for cases decided in each complete fiscal year.04008001,2001,600Benches including this justice, 2076/77: 1,054 daysBenches including this justice, 2077/78: 1,351 daysBenches including this justice, 2078/79: 842 daysBenches including this justice, 2079/80: 1,253 daysBenches including this justice, 2080/81: 809 daysBenches including this justice, 2081/82: 650 daysBenches including this justice, 2082/83: 432 daysAll benches, 2076/77: 1,124 daysAll benches, 2077/78: 1,360 daysAll benches, 2078/79: 962 daysAll benches, 2079/80: 903 daysAll benches, 2080/81: 821 daysAll benches, 2081/82: 696 daysAll benches, 2082/83: 368 days2076/772077/782078/792079/802080/812081/822082/83
In days, for the cases decided in each year.
Show the figures for each year
Fiscal yearCases decidedMedian time to decision (days)All benches (days)Judgments written
2075/76 (2018/19) – part year1251,2501,0790
2076/77 (2019/20)4851,0541,12410
2077/78 (2020/21)1751,3511,3604
2078/79 (2021/22)54084296221
2079/80 (2022/23)1,4571,25390385
2080/81 (2023/24)1,661809821323
2081/82 (2024/25)1,322650696330
2082/83 (2025/26)648432368105
2083/84 (2026/27) – part year862422420
Nepali fiscal years run from mid-July to mid-July. “Part year” marks the year of appointment and the current year, 2083/84; these are not shown in the charts.

Judgments written

878
judgments written by this justice
807
judgments, if the writing were shared equally on each bench

Counted from the 1,639 judgments of benches including this justice in which the published text names the justice who wrote the judgment. The writing justice is named in about half of all published texts, and in more than four in five of those from 2080/81 onwards.

Judgments written each year

Judgments written each year by Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar SharmaBars show the number of judgments in each complete fiscal year in which this justice is named as the writing justice.01002003004002076/77: 10 judgments written2077/78: 4 judgments written2078/79: 21 judgments written2079/80: 85 judgments written2080/81: 323 judgments written2081/82: 330 judgments written2082/83: 105 judgments written2076/772077/782078/792079/802080/812081/822082/83
Earlier years show fewer because the writing justice is named less often in older texts.

Analytics

The same measures, worked out the same way, for each of the 17 sitting justices. Beside each figure is the figure for all benches over the same period, and where the justices fall. The figures describe the benches on which Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma sat, not the justice's own vote. They are not a judgement of any justice's work. How these are worked out.

What happened when cases were listed

Each time a case appears on a bench's cause list, the court records what happened. Shares of 47,220 listings before benches including this justice, and of 372,092 before all benches over the same period.

This justice's benches14%9%15%46%12%
All benches14%9%15%48%10%
Decided (judgment or final order)Interim orderAdjournedNot reachedCannot hearBench did not sitOther

No result was recorded for 21% of this justice's listings (25% for all benches); they are left out of the shares. “Not reached” means the bench did not get to the case that day; how many cases are listed each day is set by the court's roster.

Show the figures
ResultThis justice's benchesAll benchesRange among the justices
Decided (judgment or final order)13.8%14.1%12.0% – 21.3%
Interim order9.5%9.1%7.5% – 15.5%
Adjourned14.9%15.0%12.7% – 21.4%
Not reached46.1%48.3%33.2% – 51.2%
Cannot hear12.3%9.7%5.9% – 12.9%
Bench did not sit2.4%2.4%0.0% – 3.4%
Other1.2%1.3%0.4% – 3.5%
Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Every listing (one case on one bench's cause list on one day) from the justice's appointment, by the result the court recorded.
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
No result recorded: 21% of this justice's listings (10% to 25% across the justices). Some listings name no justices and cannot be counted for anyone.
Comparing justices
Every justice on a bench is counted for the bench's listings; most benches have two justices. Compared with all benches over the same period, because practice changes from year to year.

Cannot hear (हेर्न नमिल्ने)

12.3%
of listings recorded as “cannot hear”
9.7% all benches, same period
−3.2 ptsall benches+3.2 pts

Each circle is one of the sitting justices, compared with all benches over that justice's own period; the filled circle is this justice. Names are not shown.

On two-justice benches: 10.5% with this justice; the same colleagues on two-justice benches without this justice: 8.7%.

By fiscal year

Benches including this justiceAll benches
Share of listings recorded as “cannot hear”, by fiscal year: benches including this justice, and all benchesTwo lines, one point per Nepali fiscal year. Years with fewer than 300 listings for this justice's benches, or before appointment, have no point.0%5%10%15%20%All benches, 2073/74: 6.8%All benches, 2074/75: 7.2%All benches, 2075/76: 9.7%All benches, 2076/77: 9.9%All benches, 2077/78: 9.1%All benches, 2078/79: 10.7%All benches, 2079/80: 12.2%All benches, 2080/81: 9.5%All benches, 2081/82: 8.1%All benches, 2082/83: 9.3%Benches including this justice, 2075/76: 9.3%Benches including this justice, 2076/77: 7.6%Benches including this justice, 2077/78: 10.1%Benches including this justice, 2078/79: 14.3%Benches including this justice, 2079/80: 13.5%Benches including this justice, 2080/81: 13.5%Benches including this justice, 2081/82: 10.6%Benches including this justice, 2082/83: 14.0%2073/742016/172074/752017/182075/762018/192076/772019/202077/782020/212078/792021/222079/802022/232080/812023/242081/822024/252082/832025/26
Share of listings recorded as “cannot hear”, by Nepali fiscal year (mid-July to mid-July; the year in AD below). The scale is the same on every justice's page. No point is shown for a year with fewer than 300 listings with a result before this justice's benches, or before appointment; the current year, 2083/84, is in the table only.
Show the figures for each year
Fiscal yearListings with a resultCannot hear, this justice's benchesCannot hear, all benches
2075/76 (2018/19) – part year1,7449.3%9.7%
2076/77 (2019/20)4,3027.6%9.9%
2077/78 (2020/21)3,26110.1%9.1%
2078/79 (2021/22)6,73014.3%10.7%
2079/80 (2022/23)8,73913.5%12.2%
2080/81 (2023/24)9,42213.5%9.5%
2081/82 (2024/25)8,16010.6%8.1%
2082/83 (2025/26)4,64814.0%9.3%
2083/84 (2026/27) – part year214too few5.9%

“Part year” marks the year of appointment and the current year. “Too few”: fewer than 300 listings with a result.

Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Listings for which the bench recorded that it cannot hear the case (हेर्न नमिल्ने). This is the proper course when a justice has a conflict of interest, for example in a case that a justice on the bench handled earlier as an advocate or decided earlier in a lower court. The case is then listed before another bench.
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
The court records no reason: none of the 47,735 such listings carries a remark. The entry belongs to the bench, so it does not say which justice could not hear the case. Linked cases are often listed together, so a few days can account for many listings.
Comparing justices
The colleague comparison holds the colleagues fixed, not the cases: the same case is often declined by more than one bench.

Adjourned (स्थगित)

14.9%
of listings adjourned
15.0% all benches, same period
−2.2 ptsall benches+2.2 pts

Each circle is one of the sitting justices, compared with all benches over that justice's own period; the filled circle is this justice. Names are not shown.

Who asked, as recorded: a party or its lawyer 88%, the government attorney 5%, because of a linked case 5%.

Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Listings recorded as adjourned (स्थगित).
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
Who asked for the adjournment is recorded for almost every one.
Comparing justices
Most adjournments are asked for by the parties' lawyers, so this reflects the cases before the bench as much as the bench.

Time to decision

842 days
median; 9 in 10 cases within 2,693 days
777 days (9 in 10 within 2,344) all benches, same period
−148 daysall benches+148 days

Each circle is one of the sitting justices, compared with all benches over that justice's own period; the filled circle is this justice. Names are not shown.

Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Days from registration at the Supreme Court to the judgment or final order, for the 6,499 cases decided by benches including this justice; each case counted once.
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
Decisions before 1 August 2016 are not in the records.
Comparing justices
Depends on the kinds of cases a bench is assigned and on how long they had been pending; justices do not choose their cases.

Appeals decided

How the lower court's decision fared, for 3,114 appeals decided by benches including this justice and 23,158 by all benches over the same period.

This justice's benches73%7%12%
All benches75%8%9%
UpheldPartly reversedReversedSent back to a lower courtOther or not classified

Upheld is not better or worse than reversed. The records rarely say who appealed (the prosecution or the accused, for example), so they cannot say which side a result favoured.

Show the figures
OutcomeThis justice's benchesAll benchesRange among the justices
Upheld72.6%75.0%65.1% – 79.9%
Partly reversed5.9%8.4%5.9% – 15.1%
Reversed7.3%9.5%5.5% – 16.9%
Sent back to a lower court2.7%2.5%0.6% – 5.8%
Other or not classified11.6%4.7%1.1% – 11.6%
Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Final decisions in appeal cases (case codes CR, CI, RB and RC), by the decision type the court recorded. Each case is counted once.
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
Not classified: 12% of this justice's appeals. The appellant is named in the records for only about one criminal appeal in ten.
Comparing justices
The mix of criminal and civil appeals differs between benches.

Writ petitions granted (रिट जारी)

33.8%
of 625 writ petitions decided
33.6% all benches, same period
−7.4 ptsall benches+7.4 pts

Each circle is one of the 15 justices whose benches decided at least 100 writ petitions, compared with all benches over that justice's own period; the filled circle is this justice.

Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Final decisions on writ petitions (case codes WO, WC, WH, WS and WF) recorded as granted (जारी), in full or in part.
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
Not classified: 8% of this justice's writ decisions. Habeas corpus orders are often recorded differently and may be under-counted.
Comparing justices
Writ petitions differ widely in subject, and a bench's share depends on which petitions it is assigned.

Leave to appeal or review granted (अनुमति हुने)

47.6%
of 2,517 applications decided
39.7% all benches, same period
−18.6 ptsall benches+18.6 pts

Each circle is one of the 17 justices whose benches decided at least 100 applications, compared with all benches over that justice's own period; the filled circle is this justice.

Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Applications for leave to appeal or for review (case codes RI, LE, RV and NF) recorded as granted (अनुमति हुने).
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
Nearly all are classified.
Comparing justices
Leave granted means the case goes on to a full hearing; it is not a decision on the merits.

Corruption cases (भ्रष्टाचार)

1,132 days
median time to decision, 103 corruption cases decided
1,590 days (1,088 cases) all benches, same period
−677 daysall benches+677 days

Each circle is one of the 14 justices whose benches decided at least 50 corruption cases, compared with all benches over that justice's own period; the filled circle is this justice.

Outcomes are not shown: the records do not say whether the prosecution or the accused appealed, and the result changes with the definition used.

Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Cases of the kinds the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) prosecutes: corruption, bribery, illicit enrichment, false certificates and misappropriation of public property. Banking offences and money laundering are not included.
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
Identified by the case type registered at the court; the prosecuting body is not recorded.
Comparing justices
Corruption appeals are few for each justice and are assigned by roster.

Benches

28 cases
listed per sitting, over 2,110 sittings on 1,683 days
27 cases all benches, same period
−5.9 casesall benches+5.9 cases

Each circle is one of the sitting justices, compared with all benches over that justice's own period; the filled circle is this justice. Names are not shown.

Size of bench

This justice's sittings15%72%13%
All benches22%71%
One justiceTwo justicesThree or more

Sat most often with, on 1,516 two-justice sittings

  • Sapana Pradhan Malla90 (6%)
  • Tek Prasad Dhungana89 (6%)
  • Mahesh Sharma Poudel72 (5%)
  • Sunil Kumar Pokhrel43 (3%)
  • Nripadhwaj Niraula43 (3%)
  • Abdulajeej Musalman38 (3%)
  • Other sitting justices248 (16%)
  • Justices since retired893 (59%)
Definition, source and gaps
What it counts
Sittings (one bench on one day) on which this justice was named: the cases listed per sitting, the number of justices on the bench, and the colleague on each two-justice sitting.
Source
Supreme Court cause lists and hearing records, 1 August 2016 to 30 October 2026.
Gaps in the record
The court's bench-type field is filled for only 18% of listings, so the size of a bench is counted from the names listed. The same sitting is sometimes written in two ways in the records; these are counted as one.
Comparing justices
The Chief Justice sets the rosters; justices do not choose their benches or colleagues.

Records to 30 October 2026 (2083-07-13 BS). Each justice is counted from the date of appointment, so the figures for justices appointed in 2025 cover a shorter period.

These figures describe the benches on which Chief Justice Dr. Manoj Kumar Sharma sat, not the work of the justice alone. Corrections are welcome by WhatsApp at +977 976-8630501 or by email at inquiry@jawafdehi.org. About the data.