Published: 11:53 PM, 25 October 2026 Last Update: 11:56 PM, 25 October 2026
A Quiet Kind of Revenge
Md. Sadman Soumik
Imagine a small shop owner who has a quarrel over money. He believes they can sort it out by sitting together, or at highest through a civil suit. But one day a criminal complaint is filed against him. Now he spends his days with lawyers and in court. He lives in fear of being arrested. His business starts to suffer long before any court decides whether he did anything wrong. This example is hypothetical, but many people will find it familiar. So we must ask: what happens when the legal process itself is used to pressure a person?
Criminal law works to protect people and to make offenders accountable. It should not be used to settle personal scores. It should not force someone to pay a disputed debt, or frighten an opponent into leaving a lawful claim. Yet even a weak case is heavy to carry. Legal fees, lost income, public shame and endless hearings can make a person feel down. All of this can happen even long before a final decision.
This is also a question of the rule of law. Article 31 of the Constitution of Bangladesh guarantees protection of law. It says people must be treated in accordance with law. This promise is the same for the complainant and the accused. Everyone should be able to reach justice. But no one should take personal revenge through legal proceedings
This does not mean, a failed case is always a malicious or false case. A complainant may have real reasons to report an offence, even if the evidence later falls insufficient. So courts must be careful. The aim is not to discourage complaints. The aim is to prevent misuse and stop it.
The law already has provided some safeguards. Under sections 200 to 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, a Magistrate can examine the complainant. The Magistrate can also order an inquiry in suitable cases or dismiss the complaint if there is no sufficient ground to proceed. Section 204 allows the court to issue the process only when sufficient grounds exist. These steps matter because a criminal case should not move forward without a judicial consideration.
Section 561A gives the High Court Division inherent power to prevent abuse of the process of any court and to secure the ends of justice. But this is not a shortcut for every accused who says a case is false. Courts must look at the facts of each case and apply the law and relevant case decisions to find out whether there is any case to answer. If the facts are disputed and need judicial intervention, a trial may be the right place to settle them.
The main challenge is to make these safeguards effective without closing the door on actual complainants. First, complaints should be examined carefully and on time, at the stage required by law. Second, investigations should be fair and based on proper evidence, not on personal influence or public pressure. Third, courts should avoid unnecessary delay and adjournments, because delay increases burden on the accused. Fourth, if deliberate misuse is proved, the remedies in existing law may be considered. This must follow a free & fair process. No one should be punished only because a case ended in acquittal.
Lawyers, media workers and public officials have a duty too. Lawyers should not help turn a criminal case into a threat to the accused. Media should not consider an allegation as proof. Parties in a dispute should question themselves whether it is truly a criminal matter, or a matter for the civil court. The proper forum depends on the facts and the rights involved in the case.
The answer is not to make it harder for real victims to seek help. The answer is to use criminal law for its rightful purposes. A fair system must protect those who report genuine offences. It must also protect those who face malicious prosecutions. Both deserve a due process led by evidence and law, not pressure or revenge.
A criminal case should be a way of justice. It should never be weaponized in a private fight. The strength of a justice system lies in punishing wrongdoers while stopping its own procedures from being used to cause malice to innocent people.
Md. Sadman Soumik belongs to Department
of Law in Bangladesh University of Professionals (BUP), Mirpur Cantonment, Dhaka.
