भोट माग्दै गरेका उम्मेदवारमाथि कुटपिट र दुर्व्यवहार गर्ने तीनजना पक्राउ . 

Detected Manipulations & Suggested Changes

Omission of key information

Leaving out relevant context that would help readers fully understand the situation.

The article reports that Maoist candidate Raju Harijan and his team were beaten and abused while campaigning, and that the attackers questioned why they were asking for votes in an RSP area. However, it does not explain the broader political context: why the area is considered an RSP stronghold, whether there have been similar incidents, or whether any response came from RSP or other parties. It also does not mention what legal charges (if any) have been filed against the suspects, or whether the accused have given their own version of events.

4 suggestions

Add brief political context, for example: "जमुनिया बजार र आसपासको क्षेत्र गत निर्वाचनदेखि रास्वपाको प्रभाव क्षेत्र मानिन्छ, जहाँ अघिल्लो निर्वाचनमा रास्वपाका उम्मेदवारले कति मत ल्याएका थिए भन्ने तथ्यांक यसप्रकार छन् ..."

Include whether the Rastriya Swatantra Party or local leaders were contacted for comment and what they said, e.g.: "यस विषयमा रास्वपाको स्थानीय नेतृत्वसँग बुझ्न खोज्दा उनीहरूले ... भनेका छन्" or explicitly state if they could not be reached.

Specify the legal status of the case: what sections of law the suspects are being investigated or charged under, and whether they have made any statements in their defense.

Clarify whether there have been similar incidents in the area in this or previous elections, to avoid implying this is an isolated or typical event without evidence.

Unsubstantiated claims / Attribution without verification

Reporting a claim about motives or statements without clearly indicating its evidentiary status or whether it has been independently verified.

The line: "रास्वपाको क्षेत्रमा आएर किन भोट मागेको भन्दै आफ्ना उम्मेदवारलाई कुटपिट गरेको नेपाल कम्युनिष्ट पार्टी (माओवादी) ले जनाएको छ ।" attributes the motive and exact words of the attackers to a statement by the Maoist party. It is not clear whether this is corroborated by police investigation, eyewitnesses, or video evidence, or if it is solely the party's claim.

3 suggestions

Make the attribution and its status clearer, for example: "नेपाल कम्युनिष्ट पार्टी (माओवादी) को दाबी अनुसार, आक्रमणकारीहरूले ‘रास्वपाको क्षेत्रमा आएर किन भोट मागेको’ भन्दै कुटपिट गरेका थिए। यो दाबीबारे प्रहरीले थप अनुसन्धान गरिरहेको जनाएको छ।"

Add whether police or other witnesses confirm this alleged statement: "डिएसपी पन्तका अनुसार, प्रारम्भिक बयानहरूमा पनि यस्तै भनाइ आएको/नआएको छ ..."

If there is no independent verification, explicitly state that: "यो भनाइबारे स्वतन्त्र प्रमाण वा अन्य पक्षको पुष्टि भने प्राप्त भएको छैन।"

Unbalanced reporting / Selective use of sources

Relying mainly on one or two institutional sources without giving other directly involved sides a chance to respond.

The article quotes the police (DSP Pant) and the Maoist party’s account. It does not include any comment from the accused individuals or their legal representatives, nor from RSP representatives, even though the incident is framed as occurring in an "RSP area" and allegedly linked to that political context.

3 suggestions

Note whether attempts were made to contact the accused or their lawyers: "पक्राउ परेका तीन जनाको पक्ष बुझ्न खोज्दा उनीहरूले बोल्न नमानेका/सम्पर्क गर्न नसकिएको प्रहरीले जनाएको छ।"

Include a response from RSP or clearly state that they were not available: "यस विषयमा रास्वपाको जिल्ला समिति/स्थानीय नेतृत्वसँग सम्पर्क गर्दा उनीहरूले ... भनेका छन् / सम्पर्क गर्न नसकिएको हो।"

Clarify that the political affiliation of the accused is not established (if true), to avoid implying they officially represent RSP: e.g., "पक्राउ परेकाहरूको कुनै राजनीतिक दलसँग औपचारिक आवद्धता रहेको/नरहेकोबारे प्रहरीले अहिलेसम्म पुष्टि गरेको छैन।"