Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD & HCD)



Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation Head Note Parties Name Reference/Citation
Articles 7 and 12

The Appellate Division observed that the best interests of any child requires that she/he be cared for by her/his parents. This is their innate right at birth. Article 7 of the CRC also provides that a child has the right to know and be cared for by his or her parents. Naturally, when the parents are at loggerheads, it would be the duty of the courts to ensure that the best interests of the child are protected. Article 12 of the CRC provides that the child should be permitted to express her/his views freely in matters affecting her/him. This concept is also not new since the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 provides that if the minor is old enough to form an intelligent preference, the Court may consider that preference. It is with such provisions in mind that we invariably speak to the children concerned in order to find out their views and preferences.
Mainul Islam Chowdhury -Vs.- Rumana Foiz and others. (Civil) 14 ALR (AD) 37-40

Mainul Islam Chowdhury -Vs.- Rumana Foiz and others 14 ALR (AD) 37
Articles 7, 12, 20 and 21

The Family Courts Ordinance, 1985
Section 5, 16(3) r/w
Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC)
Articles 7, 12, 20 and 21 r/w
Bangladesh Citizenship (Temporary Provisions) Order, 1972
Section 2
Custody of the minor children– Custody of the minor children, particularly in this case in which the detainees are 9 & 11 year old girl children and their mother is a Japanese well settled doctor and their father being a well settled person is a Bangladeshi by birth and also a citizen of America, the paramount consideration is the welfare of the minors and not the legal right of this and that particular party. The reasons stated, pass the following order:-
i) 1. Nakano Jasmine Malika @ Jasmine Malika Sharif 2. Nakano Laila Lina @ Laila Lina Sharif aged about 11(eleven) years and 9(nine) years respectively in the custody of writ respondent No. 5 Imran Sharif is declared to be unlawful and they are being held in his custody in an unlawful manner.
ii) Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and interest of the Children, the Children namely 1. Nakano Jasmine Malika @ Jasmine Malika Sharif and 2. Nakano Laila Lina @ Laila Lina Sharif will not be taken out of the jurisdiction of this Court save and except with leave of this court.
iii) It is directed that the detainees shall remain in custody of their mother-Eriko Nakano pending disposal of the Family Suit No. 247 of 2021 at present, pending in the Court of Assistant Judge, Second Additional Court, Family Court, Dhaka.
iv) The Family Court concerned is directed to conclude the Family Suit No. 247 of 2021 within 3(three) months from the date of receipt of this order.
v) It is made clear that the observations which have been made by us are only for the limited purpose of engaging summary inquiry for consideration in the petition of Habeas corpus and will be of no assistance to either party in the custody proceedings pending in the Family Court which indeed will be decided on its own merits.
vi) The impugned judgment and order of the High Court Division is hereby set aside.
vii) The father will have the right to visit the children at a convenient agreed time, place and period.
viii) The leave petition is accordingly disposed of.
ix) The Contempt Petition No. 31 of 2021 is accordingly redundant. .....Eriko Nakano, Japan =VS= Ministry of Home Affairs, BD, (Civil), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 222] ....View Full Judgment

Eriko Nakano, Japan =VS= Ministry of Home Affairs, Bangladesh 12 LM (AD) 222