Law Minister Anisul Haque on Sunday said that Chief Justice's action against judge Mst Kamrunnahar was necessary as her observation over rape case would have misguided police.
The minister said this while talking with journalists at his office at the secretariat.
“Action against the judge will proceed following the laws and regulations and she will be asked to explain her comments,” he said.
Anisul said case filing against criminal offense is not barred by any time limitations. The minister pointed out that First Information Report (FIR) on assassination of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was lodged 21 years after the incident.
“The judge in her observation has violated both constitutional human rights and judicial law by asking police not to accept any rape case 72 hours past the incident,” said Anisul.
He said that judges have full liberty to pass verdict according to their merit and law but in this case judge Kamrunnahar’s observation was offensive.
“This observation has some implications and consequences unlike many other wrong, illegal verdicts which later get settled at the appellate division. So the chief justice had to take necessary legal measures. “, he said
The minister denied passing any comment on the case verdict but he said the reporters shouldn’t write that judicial power has been snatched from the judge as it sounds illegal.
“The chief justice has the legal power to remove the judge from her position temporarily if found guilty”.
Regarding spreading the wrong message from the observation Anisul said, “There is no chance of getting the wrong message after the government, executive division clearing its stand on the issue and the judicial division taking an immediate action.”
On Thursday, Dhaka Women and Children Repression Prevention Tribunal-7 Judge Mst Kamrunnahar acquitted all five accused from the charges of raping two girls in a hotel in the capital’s Banani area in 2017.
During the hearing the judge asked law enforcing forces to not take any rape case 72 hours after an incident as in this case the plaintiffs couldn’t prove their complaints.