New law criminalising sex through promises of marriage challenged in High Court

The Prevention of Violence Against Women and Children Act was amended following a protest over the recent Magura rape incident

A legal challenge has been mounted in the High Court against the validity of a provision of the Prevention of Violence Against Women and Children (Amendment) Ordinance that penalises only men for engaging in sex through promises of marriage.

The contest comes in a writ petition that seeks a rule asking why the amended section outlining the punishment for obtaining sex through promises of marriage should not be repealed and declared unconstitutional.

The petition states that the amended section conflicts with Articles 27, 28, 31, and 32 of the Constitution.

The plea was filed in the High Court on Monday, and named the Secretary of the Law and Justice Division, the Secretary of the Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division, and the Secretary of the Ministry of Women and Children Affairs as defendants.

A hearing on the petition may be held this week in the dual bench of Justice Razik-Al-Jalil and Justice Tamanna Rahman Khalidi.

In March, people from all walks of life raised their voices in protest against the rape and subsequent murder of a child in Magura.

During the movement, demands were made to expedite cases related to violence against women and children, including rape. The interim government accepted these demands and decided to amend the existing law.

Following this decision, on Mar 20, the advisory council approved the amendment to the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act, introducing a provision for a maximum of seven years imprisonment if one person deceives another into consenting to sexual relations based on the promise of marriage.

On Mar 25, the amended law was issued in the form of an ordinance.

The amended Section 9 (2) of the Prevention of Violence Against Women and Children Act now punishes sexual intercourse with a woman above the age of 16 with rigorous imprisonment and a fine, provided the sexual act was obtained through promises of marriage.

Supreme Court lawyer Rashidul Hasan and human rights organisation “Aid for Man Foundation” have filed the writ petition.

Counsel for the petitioner, Ishrat Hasan, told bdnews24.com: “If an adult man and woman engage in a consensual sexual relationship out of wedlock, it is unreasonable to punish only the man.”

“According to Islamic law, both men and women must be punished in cases of such physical relationships. Therefore, making only one party liable for punishment conflicts with the Constitution, which upholds the principle of equality.”

She added, “It is not a crime for a man and woman to engage in sexual relations based on a promise. It only constitutes a crime when the promise of marriage isn’t fulfilled after the sexual relationship has taken place. Is the law indirectly promoting adultery? That is why we have sought the revocation of this specific section through the writ (petition).”