The High Court has issued a rule seeking mandatory disclosure of the previous and existing marriages, children and government-issued identification details of both the bride and groom in Kabin Nama (marriage document) to prevent fraud and concealment of information.
A High Court bench comprising Justice Ahmed Sohel and Justice SM Iftekhar Uddin Mahmud issued the rule on Monday.
Supreme Court lawyer Ishrat Hasan filed the writ petition in the public interest.
Advocates Sheikh Omar and Tanzila Rahman Jui represented the petitioner at the hearing.
The secretaries of the Law and Justice Division and the Legislative and Parliamentary Affairs Division, and the inspector general of the Directorate of Registration were made respondents to the petition.
The petition said the existing Bangladesh Form No. 1601, commonly known as Form D, does not provide an effective mechanism to disclose and verify the previous and existing marriages of either party, former spouses, marriage and divorce records, children, or ongoing legal obligations such as maintenance and guardianship.
Under the current Kabin Nama, a groom is required to provide certain information about an existing wife and permission from the arbitration council, but there is no requirement to disclose details of all previous marriages, divorces, former wives and children. A similar mechanism to verify a bride’s previous marital history is also absent.
The petition said the lack of mandatory disclosure allows individuals to conceal important information when entering into subsequent marriages, potentially leading to fraud and family disputes. It may also deprive prospective spouses of the opportunity to make fully informed decisions and jeopardise the legal rights of existing spouses and children.
The petitioner sought amendments to the Kabin Nama requiring disclosure and verification of both parties’ previous and existing marriages, children from previous or existing marriages, ongoing maintenance and guardianship obligations, other legal liabilities, and birth registration, National ID or passport numbers.
After the hearing, the court asked why the authorities’ inaction in updating the nikahnama to include such information should not be declared unlawful and why necessary directions should not be issued to amend the relevant form to protect citizens’ family lives and legal rights.