In a disturbing incident aboard a launch in Bangladesh, two young women were brutally beaten -- struck 11 times -- while a crowd surrounded them, recording, cheering, and repeatedly shouting, “this is what is needed.”
There was no clear mention in news-reports of what “immoral act,” if any, had supposedly provoked the mob’s wrath. Was it that the women were existing in the public space with them? Or were they committing a crime punishable by law?
Regardless of the matter, there could be no justification for laymen to take the law in their own hands to “punish” some random women on a launch.
The violence was not only cowardly but also alarmingly indicative of a society where selective morality, rooted in deep-seated misogyny, is wielded to control and humiliate women in public spaces.
One of the perpetrators, a man named Nehal, shamelessly justified the assault by claiming he was “disciplining” the women “as a brother.” Such misogyny, often disguised as moral concern, is a dangerous form of vigilante justice that flagrantly violates the rule of law.
Let me be unequivocal, what happened on that launch is not just a social and religious failing, it is a legal crime, and one with multiple dimensions under the Penal Code of 1860. The law, as it stands, is clear. The problem lies not in its ambiguity but in its application and public respect for it and women in general.
Nehal told local journalists: “I did this for their own good … As a brother, I intervened by striking them … I respect the law … I hit them two or three times as a brother.”
This statement is revealing not only in its absurdity but also how he attempted to undermine his actions to simply “hitting them two or three times to protect them” when in fact the video shows that he hit them at least 11 times.
The violence was not only cowardly but also alarmingly indicative of a society where selective morality, rooted in deep-seated misogyny, is wielded to control and humiliate women in public spaces
The invocation of “brotherly concern” to justify violence is not only offensive, it is deeply dangerous. It reflects a patriarchal mindset that continuously claims ownership and control over women under the guise of morality in Bangladesh.
It demonstrates how individuals, particularly men, often conflate moral policing with lawful conduct, believing that violence can be excused so long as the description of the act is sugar-coated with “care” and “for being done for one’s own good.”
We can easily denote at the onset from simply viewing the video footage that Nehal’s actions, and those of the crowd who incited, encouraged, and facilitated the violence, has aided and abetted the offense as per Section 109 Penal Code, 1860.
Indeed, it directly fulfils the ingredients of and contravenes several offenses punishable under the Penal Code, 1860 such as Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt) Section 351 (Assault) and Section 355 (Assault or criminal force with intent to dishonour a person, otherwise than on grave provocation), Section 354 (Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty), Section 503 (Criminal intimidation) and Section 509 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman).
The collective conduct of the attackers and spectators, cheering, filming, and inciting, falls squarely within these categories.
In this particular incident on the launch, a case was filed on May 11, 2025, by the Muktarpur River Police Sub-Inspector, who acted as the plaintiff against Nehal and 20 to 25 unnamed individuals. As per news reports, the case was filed under Section 11 of the Nari o Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain 2000 (Women and Children Repression Prevention Act 2000), although the facts, from what is apparent from the video of Nehal beating the women, does not indicate that the perpetrator was engaged in the beating with the purpose of fulfilling their sexual desire but rather to police the women for their “immoral behaviour.”
Albeit in this case, the police acted in favour of the victims, often it is the case that the police only begin investigating crimes after public outcry.
The numerous examples of moral policing of women in public spaces by strangers, in violation of their rights under the Constitution of Bangladesh, reflects a broader social rot that no law alone can cure.
The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), Section 154 clearly obliges police officers to register a First Information Report (FIR) upon receiving information about a cognisable offense. The law does not demand a formal complaint if the offense is clear and visible, a public video depicting criminal assault suffices.
Under the Constitution of Bangladesh, Article 27 guarantees equality before the law. Article 31 further enshrines the right of every citizen to protection under law. A state cannot claim adherence to the rule of law if its agents act only when their inaction becomes a national scandal.
Bangladesh suffers from a disturbing and pervasive culture of misogyny, one that is not restricted to the illiterate or rural, nor to any single class or ideology. However, the reactionary violent attack is a culmination of misogyny coupled with intolerance.
And intolerance in Bangladeshis exists across the political and religious spectrum, from the Islamophobic left-wing that preaches religiosity as inherently regressive, to the patriarchal right-wing that manipulates religious laws and concepts to justify and conform religion with their own ideas and actions.
In this toxic and intolerant culture, minding one’s own business has become a radical act. The violence on the launch is not an isolated incident -- it is symptomatic of a wider problem that is akin to extremism.
Whether it is the left wing elite mocking religious identity or the “holier-than-thou” right wing weaponizing faith to dominate women, Bangladesh is trapped between two poles of intolerance. A very small section of people exist in-between.
The obsession with regulating women's attire, behaviour, or presence in public spaces is less about ethics and more about control. Intolerant people cannot seem to mind their own business because doing so would mean relinquishing the power they have enjoyed through silence, complicity, and cultural conditioning.
To restore any semblance of order and dignity, the perpetrators in this case must be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. But legal accountability is only the first step.
We must also confront the broader culture that enables and excuses such violence. Bangladesh stands at a crossroads. Either we uphold the rule of law and protect individual dignity regardless of gender, or we slide further into a society where morality is mob rule and religion is manipulated to justify abuse.
What Bangladesh needs, even more than new laws, to protect women and prevent them from being victims of targeted misogyny driven harassment, is an educated nation.
This includes the police force, and includes awareness of laws as well as re-reading and understanding of religious and secular principles outside of one’s cultural influence to foster a tolerant mindset towards people who do not conform to one’s ideas, beliefs, and lifestyle.
Barrister Tajriyaan Akram Hussain is an associate at Mahbub & Company, a law firm in Bangladesh and a practicing advocate at the District and Sessions Judge Court, Dhaka.
