NN Special :
Thousands of trial seekers, particularly women, have been waiting for judgment from the Women and Children Repression Prevention Tribunals (WCRPT) for years.
What they have obtained from the courts during lingered time are the changing dates and the lame excuses of the lawyers. They are totally uncertain when their cases will be disposed of.
A provision that directs no case can be disposed of without testimony of the witnesses are blamed by the public prosecutors to be mainly responsible for the unexpected delay.
According to the tribunal records, currently around 13,000 cases are laying pending with the five Women and Children Repression Prevention Tribunals across the country.
The government enacted the Women and Children Repression (Special Provision) Act in 1995 to toughen action against anti-women and children crimes.
The act, however, was replaced by the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act in 2000, which was again amended as Women and Children Repression Prevention (Amended) Act in 2003.
The cases disposed of since the formation of the tribunals, majority were proved as false and fabricated while the accused were handed down punishment in a very small number of cases.
The indifference of judges, law enforcers and lawyers, absent of witness, manpower shortage and lack of logistic support are mostly stated by some lawyers and court officials to be responsible for the pending of huge number of cases.
Many female victims had to file cases against their husbands mainly due to torturing them for dowry, divorcing them and marrying second time. Such plaintiffs have been waiting for judgment for years.
They have to pay Tk 1000-2000 to the public prosecutors every two months. “My husband married second time and sent a divorce letter to me after two months of filing a case against him in 2006, Rabeya Khatun, 24, hailing from the city’s Jatrabari area told The New Nation on Thursday. She came to the tribunal-4 with her two daughters.
“I have already spent Tk 30,000 giving it to the police and the public prosecutors to fight with my case. But I am unaware when I can see justice” she said.
Mahbub Hasan Rana, lawyer of Judge Court, said that there is a provision of the WCRPT Act to dispose of such cases within 180 working days since the time of the trial process. Similarly, there is also a provision in the act that no case can be disposed of without statement of the witnesses.
He said, if the judge cannot dispose of the case within the stipulated time for the witness reason or other reason, he must seek more time from the High Court. Otherwise, he will be considered as the illegible one for negligence of his duty, he added. But the work, he says, is hardly done.
Producing of witnesses before the court is the duty of the public prosecutors through legal process. But in most cases, they ignore their duties, which causes huge pending of cases in the court, Mahbub says.
Earlier in the Court of Criminal Procedure cases, the 120 days time frame was extended to 180 days and 240 days to 360 days. But later the Section 339 (C) was omitted for which the Judges cannot dispose of any case as desired without the statements of the witnesses, Md. Mizanur Rahman, a lawyer of the Supreme Court, told The New Nation.
In 2000, the WCRPT-1 was first formed in Dhaka Judge Court with some Sections of the Penal Code, including Section 364 (abduction), Section 365 (kidnapping) and some Sections of the Dowry and Prohibition Act-1983. Later the tribunal was divided into five.
Though the aim of the WCRPT is to judge the cases filed for oppression on the women and children, on an average only 20 to 40 cases are disposed of in each tribunal every month, some public prosecutors and officials of the tribunals said.
Sufia Begum, who filed a case against her husband several years ago, told this reporter that she brought Tk 3 lakh from her parents and with that money she sent her husband to Saudi Arabia.
“Coming back, he again demanded Tk 2 lakh more. “As I refused, he started to torture me physically,” she said. Even one day, he ousted me with my two children out of his house, she said, adding that she had been waiting for justice from the tribunal-1 for several years.
Advocate Mizanur Rahman blamed the omitting of the Section 339 (C) of the Court of Criminal Procedure as the reason of pending of cases with the tribunals.
The Section 339 C (1) states, “A Magistrate shall conclude the trial of a case within one hundred and twenty days from the date on which the case is received by him for trial”. The Section 339 C (2) says, “A Session Judge, an Additional Session Judge, or an Assistant Session Judge shall conclude the trial within two hundred and forty days from the date on which the case is received by him for trial”. There was no restriction whether the witnesses appeared or not.
An employee of the Tribunal-4 said, there are about 3,000 cases pending in the court. Of those 1,000 are yet to be gone to the trial process. Most of the accused get free from the allegation due to lack of witnesses, he added.
Public Prosecutor (PP) of the tribunal-4 Mohammad Forkan Mia said the plaintiffs could hardly produce witnesses before the tribunals. That is why, huge cases remain pending in the courts. In tribunal-4, on an average about 40 cases are disposed of every month in this tribunal.
The cases filed following feud between husbands and wives are disposed of shortly as they intend to dismiss the case at one stage. But the cases filed for eve teasing related matters and others take a long time, he went on saying.
Md. Abdul Bari, PP of the Tribunal-1, said, “The cases could not be finalised shortly for the absent of witnesses in spite of serving them notices several times”.
The threat from the criminals is one of the reasons behind the absent of witnesses, he said.
“Judges don’t be as attentive as they should be during the hearing on any case as most cases filed under Section-7 and 11 for assaulting for dowry are found false that leads to the huge cases pending in the tribunals”, said Advocate Ashraf-ul-Alam.
Punishment to the plaintiffs for lodging false cases is rare despite having a provision in this regard, he added.
Abdul Kader, Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP), of the Tribunal-3 which is now run under Tribunal-5, said, if plaintiff’s cases are found false by investigation of the police that are dismissed under Section 17.
The tribunal has annulled about three false cases in the last eight months after submission of final report by the police, he added.
There is no judge in the tribunal-3 since April 13 this year as Rezanur Rahman, ex-Judge of the tribunal, was transferred to the Rajbari District Judge Court, the APP said.
The activities of tribunal-3 are now operated in the tribunal-5, which hampers the rapid activities of disposing of cases in the tribunal, he depicted.
Thousands of trial seekers, particularly women, have been waiting for judgment from the Women and Children Repression Prevention Tribunals (WCRPT) for years.
What they have obtained from the courts during lingered time are the changing dates and the lame excuses of the lawyers. They are totally uncertain when their cases will be disposed of.
A provision that directs no case can be disposed of without testimony of the witnesses are blamed by the public prosecutors to be mainly responsible for the unexpected delay.
According to the tribunal records, currently around 13,000 cases are laying pending with the five Women and Children Repression Prevention Tribunals across the country.
The government enacted the Women and Children Repression (Special Provision) Act in 1995 to toughen action against anti-women and children crimes.
The act, however, was replaced by the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act in 2000, which was again amended as Women and Children Repression Prevention (Amended) Act in 2003.
The cases disposed of since the formation of the tribunals, majority were proved as false and fabricated while the accused were handed down punishment in a very small number of cases.
The indifference of judges, law enforcers and lawyers, absent of witness, manpower shortage and lack of logistic support are mostly stated by some lawyers and court officials to be responsible for the pending of huge number of cases.
Many female victims had to file cases against their husbands mainly due to torturing them for dowry, divorcing them and marrying second time. Such plaintiffs have been waiting for judgment for years.
They have to pay Tk 1000-2000 to the public prosecutors every two months. “My husband married second time and sent a divorce letter to me after two months of filing a case against him in 2006, Rabeya Khatun, 24, hailing from the city’s Jatrabari area told The New Nation on Thursday. She came to the tribunal-4 with her two daughters.
“I have already spent Tk 30,000 giving it to the police and the public prosecutors to fight with my case. But I am unaware when I can see justice” she said.
Mahbub Hasan Rana, lawyer of Judge Court, said that there is a provision of the WCRPT Act to dispose of such cases within 180 working days since the time of the trial process. Similarly, there is also a provision in the act that no case can be disposed of without statement of the witnesses.
He said, if the judge cannot dispose of the case within the stipulated time for the witness reason or other reason, he must seek more time from the High Court. Otherwise, he will be considered as the illegible one for negligence of his duty, he added. But the work, he says, is hardly done.
Producing of witnesses before the court is the duty of the public prosecutors through legal process. But in most cases, they ignore their duties, which causes huge pending of cases in the court, Mahbub says.
Earlier in the Court of Criminal Procedure cases, the 120 days time frame was extended to 180 days and 240 days to 360 days. But later the Section 339 (C) was omitted for which the Judges cannot dispose of any case as desired without the statements of the witnesses, Md. Mizanur Rahman, a lawyer of the Supreme Court, told The New Nation.
In 2000, the WCRPT-1 was first formed in Dhaka Judge Court with some Sections of the Penal Code, including Section 364 (abduction), Section 365 (kidnapping) and some Sections of the Dowry and Prohibition Act-1983. Later the tribunal was divided into five.
Though the aim of the WCRPT is to judge the cases filed for oppression on the women and children, on an average only 20 to 40 cases are disposed of in each tribunal every month, some public prosecutors and officials of the tribunals said.
Sufia Begum, who filed a case against her husband several years ago, told this reporter that she brought Tk 3 lakh from her parents and with that money she sent her husband to Saudi Arabia.
“Coming back, he again demanded Tk 2 lakh more. “As I refused, he started to torture me physically,” she said. Even one day, he ousted me with my two children out of his house, she said, adding that she had been waiting for justice from the tribunal-1 for several years.
Advocate Mizanur Rahman blamed the omitting of the Section 339 (C) of the Court of Criminal Procedure as the reason of pending of cases with the tribunals.
The Section 339 C (1) states, “A Magistrate shall conclude the trial of a case within one hundred and twenty days from the date on which the case is received by him for trial”. The Section 339 C (2) says, “A Session Judge, an Additional Session Judge, or an Assistant Session Judge shall conclude the trial within two hundred and forty days from the date on which the case is received by him for trial”. There was no restriction whether the witnesses appeared or not.
An employee of the Tribunal-4 said, there are about 3,000 cases pending in the court. Of those 1,000 are yet to be gone to the trial process. Most of the accused get free from the allegation due to lack of witnesses, he added.
Public Prosecutor (PP) of the tribunal-4 Mohammad Forkan Mia said the plaintiffs could hardly produce witnesses before the tribunals. That is why, huge cases remain pending in the courts. In tribunal-4, on an average about 40 cases are disposed of every month in this tribunal.
The cases filed following feud between husbands and wives are disposed of shortly as they intend to dismiss the case at one stage. But the cases filed for eve teasing related matters and others take a long time, he went on saying.
Md. Abdul Bari, PP of the Tribunal-1, said, “The cases could not be finalised shortly for the absent of witnesses in spite of serving them notices several times”.
The threat from the criminals is one of the reasons behind the absent of witnesses, he said.
“Judges don’t be as attentive as they should be during the hearing on any case as most cases filed under Section-7 and 11 for assaulting for dowry are found false that leads to the huge cases pending in the tribunals”, said Advocate Ashraf-ul-Alam.
Punishment to the plaintiffs for lodging false cases is rare despite having a provision in this regard, he added.
Abdul Kader, Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP), of the Tribunal-3 which is now run under Tribunal-5, said, if plaintiff’s cases are found false by investigation of the police that are dismissed under Section 17.
The tribunal has annulled about three false cases in the last eight months after submission of final report by the police, he added.
There is no judge in the tribunal-3 since April 13 this year as Rezanur Rahman, ex-Judge of the tribunal, was transferred to the Rajbari District Judge Court, the APP said.
The activities of tribunal-3 are now operated in the tribunal-5, which hampers the rapid activities of disposing of cases in the tribunal, he depicted.
