Rape is the ugliest form of violence against women in the society. It is one of the brutal sexual offence that cause severe physical, mental and social consequence for the victim and her family. The brutal forms of rape become horrifying in recent days. Gang rape, child rape including minor girl rape, video recording of the incident and subsequent blackmailing for extortion & repeated rape, murder followed by rape have become more prevalent nowadays. All these have made rape as the major concern of our society. The Nari o Shishu Nirjaton Damon Ain (hereinafter NSA) 2000 of Bangladesh includes stringent provisions and severe punishment for rape. However, reports show, despite the law and the punishment, incidence of rape including brutal rapes like child rape, gang rape, blackmailing the victim using the video of the incident, etc. is rampant ranging from family circles, work, roads, transports, school, prison, and so on, though not necessarily reported to the police due to associated social stigma, fear of reprisal from rapist, expense involved, lengthy conviction process, no certainty of conviction, and many other reasons. The required evidences may be lost or destroyed and the conviction does not possible. In fact, whatever the tiny proportion of the rape incidents reported to police, almost all end with no conviction. Tipu and Shaon (2017), based on data of five Women and Children Repression Prevention Tribunals in Dhaka showed that during the period 2003-2016 there were 4436 rape cases of which 2057 (46%) disposed. The conviction rate, however, appalling; only 16 (0.77%). The Daily Star in its editorial on May 28, 2017 reported that, according to police data, 18,668 rape cases were filed during the last five years and there were only 22 convictions. In many occasions, police have been solely blamed for both low reporting and no conviction of rape cases. ASK data show that, the percentage of case file among the reported rape incidents however remains almost same (55-56%) during the years 2013 to 2016 with an increase to 63.2% in 2017. Rawat (20174), using the Bangladesh police statistics, showed that a total of 18,508 cases of rape have been filed with the police across the country during the period 2012 to 2016. The conviction rate in England & wales was only 7% in 2013 (Hohl & Stanko, 2015). The five Women and Children Repression Prevention Tribunals in Dhaka, up to 2016 since started handling cases in 2003, received 4436 rape cases. Of these cases 2057 (46%) has been disposed. The conviction rate, however, appalling; only 16 or 0.77% (Islam and Shaon, 20176). Low conviction rate leads to low confidence among the rape victims and their families about getting justice. The present study intended to find out why rape cases end with no conviction or low number of convictions through examining the rape conviction process, more specifically role of different actors, in Bangladesh. It is expected that findings of the study will help the policy makers, investigators, prosecutors and activists to improve the situation.

Victims or her relatives who record the incidence with police usually follow the following sequence involving three major institutions, i.e., the police, the hospital, and the courts.

First, the victim reports the incidence to OC of PS as FIR through a written application describing the incidence. At this stage if the PS refused to record the case the victim can go directly to the Court or Tribunal and file the case.

Second, in case of FIR at PS, the OC of the respective PS appoints an officer as IO. In case of the PS refused the case and the victim file case in the court through an application, the Court, if finds merit, sends the case to the PS for investigation and the OC appoints an IO for investigation the case. In the process of investigation, the IO is supposed do the followings:

• Get the complainant examined by an authorized medical officer within 24 hours of the incident.
•  Prepare the necessary documents: the order of the court, passport-sized picture of the victim, consent form, medico-legal report form, etc.
•  Visit the place of occurrence (PO) and perform the following tasks: locate the accused(s); record the evidence of witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC); prepare site plans of the place where the incident occurred; confiscate weapons, and collect other physical evidence as part of the investigation.
• Upon completion of investigation, the IO may submit a ‘charge sheet’ if finds that the offence has taken place, or a ‘final report’ if finds that the offence has not taken place or there is no merit to the case.
• The charge sheet or final report has to be submitted within 60 days. This period may be extended by an additional 30 days if required. The IO has to inform the result of the investigation (charge sheet / final report) to complainant.

Third, after the IO submits the report of the investigation, the complainant may put an objection petition or ‘naraji’ irrespective of charge sheet / final report at the court.

•  In case of charge sheet, the complainant’s objection may be against the accused being charged under incorrect provisions or the dropping of the names of any accused person/s originally named in the FIR or otherwise involved, from the charge sheet.
•  In case of final report, the complainant may object on grounds that the final report was made, i.e., the discontinuance of the process is unacceptable.
•  If the court finds merit in the complainant’s naraji petition- it may take suomoto action and order fresh investigations to be completed within 30 days or summon the IO for further details. Further enquiries under Section 202 of the CrPC may be conducted by the police or any other reputed person, or person related or by the panchayat. If there is an adverse report filed on the basis of further enquiries, the court will have to inform the complainant who may then file another naraji petition. If, on the other hand, the court finds merit in the case upon further enquiries then it may take cognizance.

Fourth, once the charge sheet is admitted, a case docket is prepared and the trial starts. The court then issues process, which in cases of rape mean that a warrant to be issued. If the warrant procedure is not honored or the accused does not make an appearance, the police may either issue a proclamation or attach the property of the accused(s).

Fifth, the trial is to be concluded within 180 days from the date of ‘the receipt of the case. If the trial is not completed within this time then the accused may be released on bail and if not released, reasons recorded for non-release. The trial may also be held in the absence of the accused if summons is not responded to or warrants not complied with.

The study adopted both quantitative and qualitative approach. The study area was six metropolitan cities of Bangladesh with metropolitan police authorities (DMP, CMP, KMP, RMP, SMP, BMP). Among the total 87 PSs of these cities, 22 were included in the study. Quantitative data were collected from 175 rape victims and 191 IOs through survey and compiled from 575 FIRs of rape cases filed in the selected PSs during 2013-2017. Under qualitative approach data were collected through KII from OCs, Medical Officers, Public Prosecutors, Court Inspectors (CI), and Judge and through case studies of rape victims. Collected data were triangulated and analyzed and presented thematically divided into sub-themes.

Rape Victims

Table-1 shows that nearly two-thirds (62%) of the rape victims were child, i.e., less than 18 years of age and 19% were minor children (aged up to 12 years). Majority (82%) of the rape victims were unmarried during the incident. In the meantime, about one-fourth of them got married. Overwhelming majority (86%) of the rape victims were educated; secondary 38%, primary 29%, higher secondary 13% and graduate and higher 5%. There is no change in the level of education of the victims since the incident. In terms of occupation 39% of the victims was student, 26% housewife and 14% had no occupation. The rest 22% engaged in job (i.e. garments worker, private, etc.) during the incident. Nearly two thirds of the rape victims had no income during the incident which has reduced slightly now. More than half (55%) of the rape victims were from economically balanced families, i.e. their yearly total incomes and expenses were same; 30% families were deficit, i.e., their yearly total incomes were less than expenses; and 15% families were surplus, i.e., their yearly total incomes were more expenses. There is no change in the economic solvency status of the families. Majority (56%) of the rape victims live with their parents; half with only parents and another half with parents and siblings. Another 8% rape victims live with single parent (mother) and siblings. More than one-third (36%) of the rape victim live with husband, children & in-laws (18%) or only husband (12%) or husband and children (6%) indicate that these women have been able to adapt and live together with families despite the shocking incident (see Table-1).

Table 1: Socio-economic Characteristics of the Rape Victims.

Perpetrator of Rape Incidents

In case of majority (93%) of the rape cases there were one rapist. Thus, 7% of the rape cases was gang rape. Neighbor has been the rapist in highest percent of rape cases 43%, boyfriend 26% and stranger 14%. Identity of the rapists is general people 35%, Political or son/relative of elected or political leader 14%, son/relatives of rich person were 12%, driver/worker/employee 9% (Table-2).

Table 2: Perpetrator of rape incidents and their social identity.

Investigation of Rape Cases

Rape Victim at Police Station: As shown in table-3, 58% of them mentioned that the staff at the police station treated them cordially. The rest 42% victims reported misconducts at police station like negligently filed the case, discouraged, humiliated verbally and frightened but filed the case.

Table 3: Conduct of Police Station during case file.

Delayed Of Investigation: The reasons are: lack of witness, delay in medical report, due to IOs’ heavy workload, lack of necessary administrative and other facilities, victim not available, victim/ family not aware, and victim not willing to cooperate (Table-4). OCs of the rape cases, during KII, mentioned heavy workload of the IOs as the major problem in case of delay in investigation. It is notable that nearly half of the IOs mentioned that they faced negative influence during investigation of rape cases. The most common source of negative influence was political leaders followed by local mastans, elected representatives, higher officials, and so on.

Table 4: Factors of delay in rape case investigation.

The Medical Test of The Rape Victims: Data were collected from 7 medical officers using qualitative approach (KII) regarding the experience with medical test of the rape victims. MOs tested an average of 30 rape victims and found evidence of rape in average 47% of the rape victims. Among the 140 victims did medical test, only 22.9% remained unwashed and rest 77.1% washed their body before the medical test conducted (Table-5). It is clear that among the 175 rape victims of the present study, in case of only 32 (18.3%) evidence could have found through medical test.

Table 5:  Whether the victim washed body or cloth before medical test done within 24 hours of incidence.

Present Investigation Status Of The Rape Cases: One-fifth (20%) of the rape victims do not know the present status of their case indicating that the victims may have lost their interest in the case or settled it outside. Findings show that victims lost their interest with the case as it gets lengthy. Among the rest, investigation of 77% cases have completed and only 3% is continuing (Table-6).

Table 6: Present status of the case.

Note: Figures in parenthesis indicate no. of rape victim.

Result of The Completed Cases: Among the total, 92% of the rape cases, investigation ended with charge sheet, however, probably without enough evidences thus failed to convict the rapists. It is reflected through the victim’s disagreement with 27% charge sheet and 20% final report and most of them submitted naraji petition to the court (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Result of the investigation of rape cases.

Factors Limiting Investigation Of Rape Cases: ‘Evidences not properly preserved by the victim’, ‘lack of witness’, ‘delayed medical test’, ‘victim not willing to do medical test’, ‘evidences destroyed by the rapist’, ‘political power of the rapists’, ‘threat from rapists’ and ‘relatively higher social status of the rapists’ have been mentioned by the IOs as factors waning the investigation of rape cases. In addition, one important factor mentioned by the OCs is, there are large number fake rape cases and rape cases followed by love affair where scarcity of evidence is usual. Heavy workload has been mentioned as major administrative problem by the IOs along with no transportation facility.

Trial of the Rape Cases

State Of Conviction Of Rape Cases: Based on the total rape cases disposed during 2003-2017 in the Tribunals of 6 metropolitan cities, the conviction rate stands at only 2.6%; Dhaka 1.6%, Chittagong 3.6% Khulna 7.8%, Rajshahi 4.8% Barisal 9.5% and Sylhet 6.3% (Table-7).

Table 7: Conviction rate (%) of rape cases among cases disposed by year.

Factors Led To No Conviction Of Rape Cases: Major reasons of no conviction found are: ‘weak/delayed medical report’, ‘weak charge sheet’, ‘lack of evidence’, ‘lack of witness’, ‘rapist powerful’, ‘lengthy trial’, ‘settle the matter outside the court’ and ‘fake cases’ (Table-8).

Table 8: Factors behind no conviction of rape case as identified by the IOs.

Among the 134 investigation completed cases, verdict has been given to only 9 cases and the rest 125 or 93.3% cases trial is still running (Table-9). Of the 9 trial completed cases, rapists of 6 cases were convicted. The number of cases verdict given is too small to make a generalization about the conviction rate in rape cases. However, it appears from this that conviction happened in majority of the rape cases.

Table 9: Present status of the rape cases filed.

Table 10: Descriptive statistics about the cases verdict given.

Duration of Ongoing Cases: The stipulated 180 days have passed for 85% of the ongoing rape cases; the average is being 14.2 months (Figure-2). The major reasons of delay as the reporting of Judges and public prosecutors are: ‘the present judicial system requires long time for all cases’, ‘frequent change of hearing date’, ‘scarcity of witness’, ‘Naraji petition against the charge sheet or final report by the victim’, ‘hope for settlement outside court’, ‘absence of victim or witness’, ‘too many cases in the tribunal’, and ‘fake case’.

Figure 2: Whether the stipulated time of 180 days have passed.

Public Prosecutors (PP) Of the Rape Cases: Majority of the victims (60%) expressed their dissatisfaction and the rest 40% expressed satisfaction with the performance of the public prosecutor (Figure-3). Among the reasons behind dissatisfaction with the performance most frequent is ‘PP inefficient’ (59.3%) (Table-11). Sometimes the PPs play dual role and asked the victim to wait. In the meantime, the PP, along with the rapist, pressurize or tempted the victim in such a way that she has to settle the case outside the court.

Figure 3: Whether satisfied with public prosecutor.

Table 11: Reasons behind not satisfied with advocate work

Outside Court Settlement of the Rape Cases

Table-12 shows that that 6.4% filed cases settled outside court at different stages of criminal justice system. Major reasons for cases settled outside the court are: ‘victim couldn’t bear as the case lengthened’, ‘no hope for justice’, ‘threat or temptation by the rapist’, ‘weak medical report and charge sheet’, 'no hope for prove the case’, ‘get rid of humiliation’, ‘marriage / love affair’, ‘botheration’, ‘expense involved’, etc. Of those favored settlement of rape case outside court, 85.4% feels that settlement outside court would protect the victim from further harassment. This is followed by 64.6% ‘helps in getting rid from expenses incurred for running the case’, 44.8% ‘at least gets some compensation’, 35.4% ‘get rid of court harassment’ and 3.1% ‘no hope to get benefit from the case’.

Table 12: Settlement of the rape cases outside of court.

Threats received by the victims: Table-13 shows that threats received by 65% of the victims of rape cases either face to face or over telephone from the rapist, local mastans, accused’s relatives or friends and local political leader. The nature of threat was death threats, kick out from the area, further rape, and public humiliation, and indulge asset and physical harm. As shown in table-14, majority (57.9%) of the rape victims received threat during the trial phase of the case. This is followed by 39.5% at incidence, 33.3% before case file, and 28.1% during investigation. Of the stages before case file and during trial have most frequent, 48.5% each. Only 9.1% and 6.1% of the rape victims were assaulted during investigation and after charge sheet.

Table 13: Whether received any threat.

Table 14: Stage of case in which threat received and assaulted.

The study found from some special rape cases that in most cases, despite there could have been necessary cooperation at the beginning from all corners, at one stage, the victim and her family become helpless. They do not have the ability (money, resource, power or anything) to know the state of their case accurately. The reality appears so complex that they have nothing to do. A strong agency/organization (GO or NGO) required to stand beside every rape victim until the end of the case.

State Of Blaming The Rape Victim: As shown in table-15, more than half (51%) of the victims mentioned that they have been blamed for the incident by different people. The most common types of blame were ‘the victim was interested in the incident’, ‘victim did not resist the rapist’, ‘victim characterless’, ‘victim moves alone’, ‘victim wore provocative dress’, and ‘victim desperate’ (Table-16). Neighbor has been the most frequently mentioned as source of blame followed by victim’s family members, victim’s friends, accused, accused’s relatives and friends, victim’s relatives and local elite. Blaming of the victim can be identified as an obstacle to getting fair justice and ensuring the conviction of the rapist.

Table 15: Whether blamed the victim by anyone.

Table 16: Type of blame faced by rape victim.

Low conviction rate of rape cases is a reality in Bangladesh. Most of the investigation of rape case found end in charge sheet. Despite that almost all rape cases ended in no conviction. Thus, attrition of the rape cases is happening in between charge sheet and conviction. Weak charge sheet along with lack of evidence including medical test result, lengthened trial process and subsequent loss of interest of the victims in the case, inefficient handling of the rape cases by the Lawyers, and a proportion of the rape cases settled outside court are contributing to the low conviction rate of rape cases. In addition, a proportion of rape cases are fake and resulted by love affairs also settled outside the court and contributing to the low conviction rate. This low conviction rate, in turn, contributing to increasing rape incidents in the country. By all considerations the situation deserves radical improvement. A coordinating agency/cell should be established to monitor each and every rape case and support the victims until the trial completed. In addition, if the above recommendations are adopted the situation would improve.

1. Agnew R, Brezina T, Wright J, Cullen F. Strain, personality traits, and delinquency: extending general strain theory. Criminol. 2002; 40: 43-72.
2. Ali N, Sanjida A, Nur H, Nashid TK. Rape in Rural Bangladesh. Delta Med Coll J. 2015; 3: 31-35.
3. ASK (Ain O Salish Kendra). (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017). Annual Reports,
4. Baron L, Straus MA. Four Theories of Rape: A Macrosociological Analysis, Social Problems. 1987; 34: 467-489
5. Baumeister R, Catanese K, Wallace H. Conquest by force: a narcissistic reactance theory of rape and sexual coercion. Rev Gen Psy. 2002; 6: 92-135.
6. Bushman B, Bonacci A, Dijk M, Baumeister R. Narcissism, sexual refusal, and aggression: testing a narcissistic reactance model of sexual coercion. J Personal Soc Psych. 2003; 84: 1027-1040.
7. Brown, J. We mind and we care but have things changed? Assessment of progress in reporting, investigating and prosecution of rape. J Sex Aggress. 2011; 17: 263-272.
8. Cahill A. Rethinking rape. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 2001.
9. Cohen M, Sherrie HM. (n.d.) ‘Rape: Psychology, Prevention and Impact’. Yale-New. 2018.
10. Cowan G. Beliefs about the Causes of Four Types of Rape. Sex Roles. 2000; 42.
11. Gottfredson M, Hirschi T. A general theory of crime. Stanford: Stanford University Press. 1990.
12. Harrendorf MH, Malby S. Trends in Police Recorded Crime, Chapter 2. 2010.
13. Heiskanen SM. Steven M. (eds.) International Statistics on Crime and Justice. Europ Inst United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Helsinki, Finland.
14. Hohl K, Stanko E. Complaints of rape and the criminal justice system: Fresh evidence on the attrition problem in England and Wales. Europ J Criminol. 2015; 12: 324-341.
15. IPHRD Network. Why Is Gang Rape and Child Rape Skyrocketing in Bangladesh? 2015.
16. Jacob S.Why Do Men Rape? This Extensive Research Involving 50 Rapists Might Just Have An Answer. 2017.
17. Lowell G. A Review of Rape Statistics, Theories, and Policy. Undergraduate Review. 2010; 6: 158-163.
18. Malik S. Nari-o-Shishu Ain and Special Tribunals: Looking at Law and its Implementation, Dhaka: Unpublished Draft Report prepared for Naripokkho. 2004.
19. Martin K, Vieraitis L, Britto S. Gender equality and women’s absolute status: A test of the feminist models of rape. Violence against women. 2006; 12: 321-339.
20. Momin SM. Rape and blaming and punishing the victims, The Independent, Dhaka. 2015.
21. Polaschek D, Ward T. The implicit theories of potential rapists: What our questionnaires tell us. Aggression and violent behavior. 2002; 7: 385-406.
22. Prentky R, Knight R. Identifying Critical Dimensions for Discriminating Among Rapists. J Consult Clin Psychology. 1991; 59: 643-661.
23. Rawat V. ‘With 1% conviction rate in Dhaka metro areas, Bangladesh is the land of impunity for rape. Polit. 2017.
24. Saqeb M. (n.d). Rape and the law: The Post-Delhi Syndrome, Bangladesh Legal Aid Services.
25. Siegert R, Ward T. Rape and evolutionary psychology: a critique of Thornhill and Palmer’s theory. Aggression and violent behavior. 2002; 7: 145-168.
26. The Daily Star. Human rights remain at alarming level: Report, Dhaka: The Daily Star Online Report. 2018.
27. Tipu MSI, Shaon AI. Less than 1% gets punished for rape. Dhaka Tribune. 2017.
28. Yunus Y. Rape in Bangladesh 2001-2016: Who are raped by whom? 2017.