Law to Justice Article 28 types of defenses in criminal cases: Bangladesh perspective

28 types of defenses in criminal cases: Bangladesh perspective

28 types of defenses in criminal cases: Bangladesh perspective

There are several types of defenses that may be raised in a criminal case in Bangladesh. Some of the most common defenses include: 

  1. Self-defense: This defense asserts that the defendant’s actions were necessary to protect themselves or others from harm.
  2. Defense of property: This defense asserts that the defendant’s actions were necessary to protect their property from damage or theft.
  3. Mistake of fact: This defense asserts that the defendant made an honest mistake about a fact material to the crime charged.
  4. Insanity: This defense asserts that the defendant was not legally responsible for their actions because they were suffering from a mental illness or defect at the time of the alleged crime.
  5. Duress: This defense asserts that the defendant committed the crime because they were threatened with imminent harm or death if they did not comply.
  6. Entrapment: This defense asserts that the defendant was induced by law enforcement to commit a crime that they otherwise would not have committed.
  7. Alibi: This defense asserts that the defendant was not present at the time and place of the alleged crime.
  8. Consent: This defense may be raised in cases involving crimes such as assault or battery, and asserts that the victim consented to the actions that are the basis of the charge.
  1. Double jeopardy: This defense asserts that the defendant cannot be tried or punished again for the same crime. This defense applies to cases where the defendant has already been acquitted or convicted of the same crime, or where the defendant has already entered into a plea bargain for the same crime.
  2. Lack of jurisdiction: This defense asserts that the court does not have the authority to hear the case because the alleged crime was not committed within the court’s jurisdiction.
  3. Insufficient evidence: This defense asserts that the prosecution does not have enough evidence to prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
  1. Involuntary intoxication: This defense asserts that the defendant was involuntarily intoxicated at the time of the alleged crime, and therefore did not have the necessary intent to commit the crime. This defense may be raised in cases where the defendant was given drugs or alcohol without their knowledge or consent, or where the defendant was given a prescription medication that caused them to become intoxicated.
  2. Necessity: This defense asserts that the defendant’s actions were necessary to prevent greater harm from occurring. For example, if a defendant steals food to feed their starving family, they may raise the defense of necessity.
  3. Mental incompetence: This defense asserts that the defendant was not competent to stand trial at the time the case was brought against them. This may be due to a mental illness, developmental disability, or other condition that affects the defendant’s ability to understand the proceedings and assist in their own defense.
  4. Age: In some jurisdictions, defendants who are under a certain age may not be held criminally responsible for their actions. This defense may be raised in cases involving juvenile defendants.
  5. Public authority: This defense asserts that the defendant was acting under the authority of a public official or agency, and therefore did not commit a crime.
  6. Automatism: This defense asserts that the defendant was not in control of their actions at the time of the alleged crime because they were in a state of automatism, such as sleepwalking or being in a dissociative state.
  1. Intoxication: In some jurisdictions, defendants may raise the defense of intoxication if they were voluntarily intoxicated at the time of the alleged crime, and their intoxication affected their ability to form the necessary criminal intent. However, it is important to note that this defense is not generally available for all crimes, and may not be a complete defense to the charge.
  2. Defense of others: This defense is similar to self-defense, but asserts that the defendant’s actions were taken to protect someone else from harm.
  3. Consent: This defense may be raised in cases involving crimes such as sexual assault, and asserts that the victim consented to the sexual activity that is the basis of the charge.
  4. Outrageous government conduct: This defense, also known as the “entrapment by estoppel” defense, asserts that the defendant relied on the misrepresentations of a government official, and therefore did not have the necessary criminal intent to commit the crime.
  5. Authority of law: This defense asserts that the defendant’s actions were required by law, and therefore they did not commit a crime. This defense may be raised in cases involving police officers or other government officials who are acting in their official capacity.
  1. Defense of habitation: This defense asserts that the defendant’s actions were necessary to protect their home or dwelling from intrusion or harm.
  2. Abandonment or withdrawal: This defense asserts that the defendant withdrew from participating in the crime or took affirmative steps to prevent the crime from being committed. This defense may be available in cases where the defendant was initially a part of a criminal enterprise, but subsequently withdrew from the enterprise and took steps to prevent the crime from occurring.
  3. Intoxication as a mitigating factor: In some jurisdictions, defendants may raise the defense of intoxication as a mitigating factor in cases where their intoxication did not rise to the level of a defense, but may be considered in determining the appropriate sentence for the crime.
  4. Necessity as a defense to criminal liability: This defense asserts that the defendant’s actions were necessary to prevent greater harm from occurring, and therefore they should not be held criminally liable for their actions.

It is important to note that these are just a few examples of the many defenses that may be raised in a criminal case. The specific defenses that are available and the strength of those defenses will depend on the facts of the case and the laws of the jurisdiction in which the case is being tried.

Nayem Hasan Ovi
Criminal Lawyer in Bangladesh
nayemh2111@outlook.com
+8809638-748193

18  Constitutional doctrines: Bangladesh perspective

 20 Criminal law doctrines: Bangladesh perspective

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

হাই কোর্টহাই কোর্ট

হাই কোর্ট বিভাগ, যা উচ্চ আদালত নামে পরিচিত, বাংলাদেশের সংবিধানের ৯৪ অনুচ্ছেদ দ্বারা প্রতিষ্ঠিত কোর্ট অফ আপিল। এই আদালত জেলা আদালতসহ অধস্তন আদালতের রায়, আদেশ বা ডিক্রির বিরুদ্ধে আপিল, রিভিশন

থানায় মামলা নিতে না চাইলে যা করবেনথানায় মামলা নিতে না চাইলে যা করবেন

থানায় মামলা নিতে না চাইলে যা করবেন ফরিয়াদী আমলযোগ্য অপরাধ সংঘটনের পর কেউ থানায় মামলা করতে চাইলে পুলিশ বিনামূল্যে সে মামলা নিতে বাধ্য। কিন্তু বাস্তবে প্রায়ই এমন অভিযোগ শোনা যায়

আদালত অবমাননাআদালত অবমাননা

ন্যাচারাল জাস্টিসের একটি ব্যতিক্রম ঘটে যখন আদালত অবমাননার বিচার করা হয়, সুস্পষ্ট করে বললে ” Nemo debet essc judex in propria causa” অর্থাৎ যার বিরুদ্ধে অভিযোগ সে ঐ বিচার প্রক্রিয়ায়