The High Court has issued a suo motu contempt of court rule against nine prominent members of the Bar in Barishal, including the President and Secretary of the District Bar Association. The legal action follows an unprecedented display of disorder within the courtroom, involving the alleged physical intimidation of a judge and the vandalism of judicial property.
Table of Contents
Escalation in the Courtroom
On 24 February, the atmosphere within the Barishal Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court descended into chaos. According to reports and subsequent visual evidence, a group of lawyers forcibly entered the courtroom while proceedings were underway. The group stands accused of creating a tumultuous environment, shouting slogans, and physically pushing benches—actions that ultimately led to the destruction of court furniture.
The aggression reached a critical point when the lawyers allegedly directed abusive and threatening behaviour towards the presiding judge. Faced with this volatile situation, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate was compelled to adjourn the session and seek refuge in his private chambers. This disruption not only halted the day’s legal business but was described by the Supreme Court administration as a “grave interference” with the independence of the judiciary.
High Court Intervention
A High Court bench, comprising Mr Justice Fahmida Quader and Mr Justice Md. Asif Hassan, took cognisance of the matter on Wednesday. The court issued a rule asking the nine lawyers to explain within ten days why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against them and why they should not be penalised for their actions.
The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate had previously submitted a formal application and an investigative report to the Registrar General of the Supreme Court, detailing the mayhem. Deputy Attorney General Muhammad Shafiqur Rahman represented the state during the hearing, confirming that the court has scheduled the next follow-up for 11 March.
Profile of the Accused Lawyers
The following individuals have been summoned to respond to the contempt rule:
| Name | Professional Title / Role |
| Sadiqur Rahman Lincoln | President, District Bar Association |
| Mirza Riazul Islam | Secretary, District Bar Association |
| Abul Kalam Azad | District Public Prosecutor (PP) |
| Nazim Uddin Panna | Metropolitan Public Prosecutor (PP) |
| Mohsin Montu | Advocate |
| Mizanur Rahman | Advocate |
| Abdul Malek | Advocate |
| Sayeed | Advocate |
| Hafiz Khan Babu | Advocate |
A Call for Judicial Restraint
In a sternly worded press release signed by Public Relations Officer Md. Shafiqul Islam, the Supreme Court administration emphasised that such “unpleasant and unintended” incidents undermine the dignity of the legal profession. The statement confirmed that, alongside the High Court’s contempt rule, a formal criminal case has been lodged by the bench assistant of the affected court under the Law and Order Disruption (Speedy Trial) Act and various sections of the Penal Code.
The Supreme Court has urged all stakeholders to exercise maximum restraint and maintain a sense of responsibility to ensure that the wheels of justice remain unobstructed. Law enforcement agencies have been instructed to take swift legal action to prevent further repetitions of such professional misconduct.