title: Nepal — Enforcement: How hard does the regulator enforce? | advennt.io canonical: https://advennt.io/jurisdictions/nepal/enforcement/ [Jurisdictions](https://advennt.io/jurisdictions/) [Nepal](https://advennt.io/jurisdictions/nepal/) Enforcement Nepal · Question 10 of 11 # Enforcement: How hard does the regulator enforce? Unfavourable · Confirmed · AI-generated · [Back to full Nepal report →](https://advennt.io/jurisdictions/nepal/) Key section parameters | Jurisdiction | Nepal (NP) | |---|---| | Regulator | Recorded in register | | Favourability | Unfavourable | | Confidence | Confirmed | | Review status | AI-generated | | Last collected | 18 Oct 2026 | Summary answer The Nepal Police Cyber Bureau coordinated an enforcement action resulting in fifty-three arrests for operating illegal online casinos, and separately investigated an individual who used eight or more betting applications to transact over NPR 7.7 billion, with settlement reportedly routed through cry… ## Full section analysis The Nepal Police Cyber Bureau coordinated an enforcement action resulting in fifty-three arrests for operating illegal online casinos, and separately investigated an individual who used eight or more betting applications to transact over NPR 7.7 billion, with settlement reportedly routed through cryptocurrency and USDT channels. This crypto-gambling convergence suggests operators and customers are adapting settlement mechanisms to evade both the gambling prohibition and Nepal's separate foreign-exchange controls simultaneously. The Department of Tourism has separately issued a new twelve-point compliance directive tightening AML/CFT documentation, CCTV retention and payout-verification requirements for licensed casinos, a regulator circular rather than statute and therefore revocable by successor guidance. The Advertisement Regulation Act 2076's ban on promotion of gambling services, extending to affiliate marketing of betting platforms, remains unchanged and stands as a durable feature of the enforcement architecture. Online access via VPN or proxy continues to be treated as illegal conduct in its own right rather than a mere access gap, reinforcing the extraterritorial reach of the online prohibition.