HC directs to display Bangabandhu’s portrait at courtrooms


The High Court on Thursday directed the authorities concerned to display the portrait of Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman at all courtrooms across the country within two months. It asked the authorities concerned to preserve the portrait of the Father of the Nation. The court also issued a rule asking the respondents to explain in four weeks why their inaction to preserve and display the portrait of Bangabandhu should not be declared illegal.

The HC bench of Justice FRM Nazmul Ahasan and Justice KM Kamrul Kader passed the order. It also issued a rule asking the authorities concerned to explain as to why the ineffectiveness of the respondents in displaying and preserving the portrait of Bangabandhu at the courtrooms across the country would not be declared illegal. Supreme Court lawyer Subir Nandi Das filed a writ petition to the court seeking its order to hang the portrait of Bangabandhu at all the courtrooms on August 21. He said in many countries, including India, portrait of their Father of the Nation are displayed at offices and courtrooms and it is obligatory by the constitution.

Secretaries to the Law Ministry, the Public Works Ministry, the Finance Ministry and the registrar general of the Supreme Court and registrars of High Court division were made respondents to the rule. Secretaries to the ministries of law, the housing and public works and the finance and the Supreme Court registrar general and the high court registrar have been made respondents to the rule. The bench of Justice FRM Nazmul Ahsan and Justice KM Kamrul Kader came up with the order and rule following a writ petition filed by Supreme Court lawyer Advocate Subir Nandi Das challenging the inaction of the respondent to preserve and display at the courtrooms.

Talking to media Advocate Subir said that there is an obligation for the respondents to preserve and display the portrait of Father of the Nation Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman at the courtrooms as per Article 4 (A) of the constitution but they did not comply with the constitutional provision, he said.