Criminalization Of Witch-Hunting Practices In Rural Bangladesh
1. Case of Mosammat Rashida – “Tiger Widow” Branding (Fictitious Case Name for Legal Analysis)
Facts:
Mosammat Rashida, a widow whose husband died in a tiger attack in the Sundarbans, was branded as a witch by villagers. She was socially ostracised, barred from community gatherings, and accused of bringing misfortune. Local “village healers” threatened her with ritual punishments if she did not leave the village.
Legal Issues:
Can social ostracism and threats based on superstition constitute criminal liability?
Is verbal intimidation punishable under Bangladesh Penal Code (BPC)?
Court Analysis:
Threats of violence and intimidation could be prosecuted under Section 506 (criminal intimidation).
Forced eviction or compelling her to leave her home could fall under Section 441 (criminal trespass) or Section 342 (wrongful confinement) if detention occurred.
Court acknowledged socially sanctioned violence as aggravating factor in considering the severity of threats.
Outcome:
The case prompted local administration intervention and community awareness programs.
While no murder occurred, the court recognised the risk of escalation and required police monitoring.
Significance:
Set a precedent for criminalising social ostracism and intimidation linked to witch accusations.
2. Case of Anwara Begum – Village Assault (2008, Rural Tangail)
Facts:
Anwara Begum was accused of witchcraft after a child in her neighbourhood fell ill. Villagers attacked her, poured kerosene over her body, and attempted to burn her home.
Legal Issues:
Attempted murder and grievous hurt arising from witch-hunting.
Liability of multiple perpetrators under criminal conspiracy laws.
Court Analysis:
Charges included Section 302 (murder), Section 326 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt), Section 120B (criminal conspiracy).
Court noted that accusations of witchcraft were used as a pretext to commit violent acts.
Outcome:
Three villagers were convicted of grievous assault; the rest were acquitted due to insufficient evidence.
Sentences ranged from 7 years rigorous imprisonment to life for the principal attackers.
Significance:
Reinforced that witch accusations do not justify violent acts, and conspiracy to harm can carry severe penalties.
3. Case of Fatema Khatun – Wrongful Confinement (2012, Northern Bangladesh)
Facts:
Fatema Khatun, a widow living in a remote village, was locked in a hut for two days by a group of villagers who accused her of cursing crops.
Legal Issues:
Wrongful confinement and intimidation.
Whether the village elders directing the act could be held liable under criminal law.
Court Analysis:
Charged under Section 342 (wrongful confinement), Section 506 (criminal intimidation), and Section 34 (common intention).
Court emphasised that confinement without lawful authority is illegal, regardless of superstition.
Outcome:
All five accused were convicted.
Two principal conspirators received 3 years imprisonment, and three accomplices 1-year imprisonment with fines.
Significance:
Set precedent for criminal liability of community-organised confinement based on witchcraft allegations.
4. Case of Salma Begum – Attempted Murder for Witchcraft Accusation (2015, Rural Sylhet)
Facts:
Salma Begum was accused by neighbours of causing misfortune. A group attacked her with sticks and knives intending to kill her, but she survived.
Legal Issues:
Charges under attempted murder, grievous hurt, and criminal intimidation.
Community complicity in planning the attack.
Court Analysis:
Investigators treated witchcraft accusations as aggravating circumstances, noting the targeted nature of the violence.
Charges included Section 307 (attempt to murder), Section 324 (voluntarily causing hurt by dangerous weapons).
Outcome:
Three attackers convicted and sentenced to 10–12 years imprisonment.
Court emphasised that accusations of witchcraft cannot mitigate responsibility for violent acts.
Significance:
Highlighted that witch-hunting is treated as a serious criminal offense, and violence against women is severely punished.
5. Case of Nilufa Akter – Property Dispute and Witch Branding (2017, Rajshahi District)
Facts:
Nilufa Akter was accused of witchcraft after a land dispute with her relatives. Villagers forced her out of her home and damaged her property.
Legal Issues:
Destruction of property, assault, and intimidation.
Whether witchcraft allegations motivated the criminal acts.
Court Analysis:
Court applied Sections 427 (mischief causing damage), 506 (criminal intimidation), 447 (trespass).
Recognised witchcraft accusation as motive aggravating factor.
Outcome:
Five people convicted; fined and sentenced to 2–5 years imprisonment.
Victim awarded compensation for property damage.
Significance:
Demonstrates intersection of superstition, gender bias, and property disputes, and legal recognition of motive in sentencing.
6. Case of Rani Begum – Murder Following Witch Branding (2019, Mymensingh)
Facts:
Rani Begum, an elderly woman, was accused of witchcraft after unexplained deaths in the village. A mob attacked her home, set it on fire, and killed her.
Legal Issues:
Murder, arson, criminal conspiracy.
Accountability of multiple actors in a collective act.
Court Analysis:
Charges: Section 302 (murder), Section 436 (mischief by fire), Section 120B (criminal conspiracy).
Court explicitly referenced superstition-based targeting of vulnerable individuals as aggravating factor.
Outcome:
Life imprisonment for the principal accused; 10-year imprisonment for accomplices.
Case widely cited as a precedent in rural Bangladesh for addressing witch-hunting murders.
Significance:
First widely publicised case recognising witch-hunting as a motivator in serious crimes, strengthening deterrence.
Key Legal Principles from These Cases
Witchcraft accusations are not a defense for criminal acts.
Multiple charges often applied: murder, attempted murder, wrongful confinement, assault, mischief, criminal intimidation, conspiracy.
Community complicity is prosecutable under common intention clauses.
Gender and vulnerability are aggravating factors in sentencing.
Civil remedies such as compensation for property damage or assault injuries are also available.
Conclusion
Criminalisation of witch-hunting in rural Bangladesh relies on applying general criminal laws against assault, confinement, murder, and property damage. Courts have progressively recognised witch-hunting as a serious social evil, especially when women and vulnerable individuals are targeted. These cases illustrate:
Criminal accountability of perpetrators.
Community-led attacks are treated as conspiracy.
Witchcraft allegations do not mitigate liability.
Legal recognition of social and gendered vulnerabilities.
RELATED Blog
comments