which addresses the process of collection, examination, submission and evaluation of digital forensic evidence . Forensic Examination and Issues of Authenticity Forensic examinations of digital devices in Nepal are predominantly conducted by the Nepal Police's forensic department. Suspects or defendants have no legal basis to conduct or request for independent digital forensic examinations of devices seized by the police. This exclusive control over forensic examinations by the police undermines the principle of equality of arms in the criminal justice system, which is essential for a balanced and just criminal justice system. Additionally, the lack of standardized protocols for digital evidence collection and examination raises concerns about evidence tampering and authenticity. Security and Protection of Digital Evidence Despite the importance of digital evidence, Nepal lacks legal provisions and procedures for its protection. Digital evidence, including logs and trails, is often stored for limited periods without proper backup procedures or security measures, posing risks to its integrity during court proceedings. Qualifications and Expertise in Digital Forensics Digital forensic examinations in Nepal are conducted by technocrats within the police organization, without explicit statutory or legal requirements regarding their qualifications and expertise. This lack of standardized qualifications can lead to challenges regarding the credibility and admissibility of forensic reports in court. Security Concerns and Content Protection Digital evidence submitted to courts often remains insecure, stored on the same digital devices without proper wiping. This lack of security risks unauthorized access to sensitive information, potentially compromising the integrity of the evidence and victims' privacy. The digital evidence gathered by investigators are submitted to the court in the same digital device without completely wiping the device. And the cases remain sub-judice in court for many years. During the court proceedings the security of those digital devices is not maintained. Any of the court officials has easy access to those devices and content thereof. Once the case is finished, in case of defendant being acquitted, the defendant will receive the device back. But in case if the defendant is held by the court and court 32