PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL)

A compilation of PIL cases in Bangladesh

Case Number: Writ Petition No. 2813 of 2009
Date of filing: 2009/04/26
Print


Petitioners

1.    Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Truest (BLAST)
2.    Ain O Salish Kendra (ASK)
 

Respondents
  1. Secretary, Ministry of Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs
  2. Secretary, Ministry of Hill Tracts Affairs
  3. Secretary, Ministry of Establishment
  4. Registrar, Supreme Court
  5. District Judge, Rangamati Hill District
  6. District Judge, Bandarban Hill District
  7. District Judge, Khagrachari Hill District
  8. DC, Rangamati Hill District
  9. DC, Bandarban Hill District
  10. DC, Khagrachari Hill District
  11. Chittagong Hill Tracts Regional Council
  12. Barrister Raja Devasish Roy
  13. Raja Saching Pure Chowdhury
  14. Raja U Cho Prue Marma
Facts

BLAST and Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) filed a writ petition challenging Section 1(2) of the Family Court Ordinance, 1984 which bars applicability of the Family Court Ordinance in three hill districts, Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban. These three districts in the Chittagong Hill Tracts are administered under the Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation, 1900, which was amended by Act No. 38 of 2003, establishing Civil and Criminal Courts in the region. Under the amended Section 8(2) of the Regulation, the Joint District Judge has original jurisdiction in all civil matters except those arising out of family law and other customary laws of the tribal people. Section 8(4) empowers the Mouza Headman and Circle Chief to deal with cases arising out of family laws and other customary laws of a particular community (‘tribe’), but is silent about those who are not indigenous peoples (‘non-tribals’). Section 4(1) and 4(2) of the Family Court Ordinance, 1984 read together establish that an Assistant Judge’s Court shall serve as a Family Court and there shall be as many Family Courts as Assistant Judge’s Courts. There being no Assistant Judge’s Court in the three hill districts, the ‘non-tribal’ people are deprived of access to judicial remedies with respect to family disputes.

Rule/Order/Judgment
Date: 03/05/2009


Details

The High Court issued a Rule Nisi on 03.05.2009 on the respondents directing them to show cause as to why Section 2(1) of the Family Courts Ordinance should not be amended and why immediate steps should not be taken for extending the applicability of the Ordinance to the three hill districts.

Justices

Mr. Justice A.B.M. KhairulHaque

Mr. Justice Md. Mamtaz Uddin Ahmed



Database Last Updated on: 2017-02-12 15:26:45
Area of law
Adibashi,
Accountability and Institutional Reform
Keywords
Court System
Relevant statute

Constitution, Articles 27 and 31,

The Family Court Ordinance, 1984;

The Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2003





Case Number: Writ Petition No. 2813 of 2009
Date of filing: 2009/04/26

Petitioners

1.    Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Truest (BLAST)
2.    Ain O Salish Kendra (ASK)
 

Respondents
  1. Secretary, Ministry of Law Justice and Parliamentary Affairs
  2. Secretary, Ministry of Hill Tracts Affairs
  3. Secretary, Ministry of Establishment
  4. Registrar, Supreme Court
  5. District Judge, Rangamati Hill District
  6. District Judge, Bandarban Hill District
  7. District Judge, Khagrachari Hill District
  8. DC, Rangamati Hill District
  9. DC, Bandarban Hill District
  10. DC, Khagrachari Hill District
  11. Chittagong Hill Tracts Regional Council
  12. Barrister Raja Devasish Roy
  13. Raja Saching Pure Chowdhury
  14. Raja U Cho Prue Marma
Facts

BLAST and Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK) filed a writ petition challenging Section 1(2) of the Family Court Ordinance, 1984 which bars applicability of the Family Court Ordinance in three hill districts, Rangamati, Khagrachari and Bandarban. These three districts in the Chittagong Hill Tracts are administered under the Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation, 1900, which was amended by Act No. 38 of 2003, establishing Civil and Criminal Courts in the region. Under the amended Section 8(2) of the Regulation, the Joint District Judge has original jurisdiction in all civil matters except those arising out of family law and other customary laws of the tribal people. Section 8(4) empowers the Mouza Headman and Circle Chief to deal with cases arising out of family laws and other customary laws of a particular community (‘tribe’), but is silent about those who are not indigenous peoples (‘non-tribals’). Section 4(1) and 4(2) of the Family Court Ordinance, 1984 read together establish that an Assistant Judge’s Court shall serve as a Family Court and there shall be as many Family Courts as Assistant Judge’s Courts. There being no Assistant Judge’s Court in the three hill districts, the ‘non-tribal’ people are deprived of access to judicial remedies with respect to family disputes.


Rule/Order/Judgment
Date: 03/05/2009:
Details

The High Court issued a Rule Nisi on 03.05.2009 on the respondents directing them to show cause as to why Section 2(1) of the Family Courts Ordinance should not be amended and why immediate steps should not be taken for extending the applicability of the Ordinance to the three hill districts.

Justices

Mr. Justice A.B.M. KhairulHaque,  

Mr. Justice Md. Mamtaz Uddin Ahmed



Reference

Area of law
Adibashi,  Accountability and Institutional Reform

Keywords
Court System

Relevant statute

Constitution, Articles 27 and 31,

The Family Court Ordinance, 1984;

The Chittagong Hill Tracts Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2003


Related Proceedings
Database Last Updated on: 2017-02-12 15:26:45