A shocking act of mobocracy invaded the sanctity of Bangladesh’s judiciary in Barishal, where a group of lawyers stormed a courtroom, vandalised furniture, shouted at the judge, and disrupted proceedingsโprompting swift and necessary intervention from the High Court and law enforcement. This incident starkly illustrates why strict, exemplary actions are essential to curb mob-like interference that threatens judicial independence and the rule of law.
Around 2:40pm on February 24, 2026, chaos erupted in the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court (presided over by Magistrate SM Shariatullah) during an ongoing hearing. Video footage, widely circulated on social media, shows Barishal District Lawyers’ Association President Sadiqur Rahman Lincoln and several associates bursting through the doors, yelling, pointing fingers aggressively at the judge, shoving benches, scattering papers, and creating a threatening environment. The disruption forced the magistrate to adjourn the session and retreat to chambers, halting normal judicial work and instilling fear among litigants, court staff, and police constables present.
The outburst stemmed from frustration over the previous day’s bail granted to Talukder Mohammad YunusโBarishal district Awami League general secretary, former MP, and ex-bar association presidentโin a case involving alleged attacks on BNP activists. BNP-aligned lawyers had boycotted the Chief Metropolitan and Additional Chief Metropolitan Courts since morning, demanding the judge’s removal and bail revocation, alleging bias or corruption.
Mob In Court: BNP lawyers yell at judge against bail to Awami League leader
Central bank governor faces criticism over authoritarian style, lack of transparency
Jashore Swechchasebak League leader succumbs to injuries from mob attack
The Supreme Court took immediate cognisance. On February 25, a High Court bench comprising Justices Fahmida Kader and Md. Asif Hasan issued a suo motu contempt of court rule against nine lawyers, including Lincoln (president), Mirza Riazul Islam (secretary), District PP Abul Kalam Azad, Metropolitan PP Nazim Uddin Panna, and others (Mohsin Montu, Mizanur Rahman, Abdul Malek, Saeed, and Hafiz Khan Babu). The rule demands they explain within 10 days why contempt proceedings should not start and why they should not face punishment. The next hearing is set for March 11.
Meanwhile, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court’s bench assistant filed a case under the Speedy Trial Act (sections 4 and 5) and Penal Code sections 186, 189, 190, 228, and 353 against 12 named individuals (including Lincoln as prime accused and the secretary as second), plus eight unidentified othersโall reportedly BNP-affiliated.
Police arrested Lincoln from the court premises on Wednesday afternoon; the same magistrate, SM Shariatullah, rejected his bail plea and sent him to jail.
The Supreme Court issued a statement condemning the “undesirable and unexpected” events, including vandalism, aggressive behaviour toward the judge, and protests demanding removal. It emphasised that such acts severely disrupt justice delivery and called on all to exercise restraint, responsibility, and respect for the law to safeguard judicial dignity and independence.
Two DU students who assaulted women at TSC identified
Amir Hamza: The Jamaat MP who declared himself supreme overlord of Kushtia
Policeโs Rajshahi DIG orders rearrest of Awami League leaders, raising concerns
This brazen courtroom invasion is emblematic of mobocracyโwhere groups use intimidation, force, and disruption to impose their will, bypassing legal processes. Such behaviour, whether framed as protest or “resistance,” erodes public confidence in the judiciary, intimidates judicial officers, and paralyses justice for ordinary citizens. It sets a dangerous precedent if left unchecked.
Senior journalist and political analyst Probir Kumar Sarker observed that the High Court’s contempt rule, the speedy case filing, Lincoln’s arrest and remand, and the Supreme Court’s firm stance represent crucial steps toward accountability. Strict enforcementโthrough contempt penalties, disbarment where warranted, and deterrent sentencesโis vital to deter future mob actions in courts. No political affiliation or grievance justifies turning courtrooms into battlegrounds.
The judiciary must remain a fortress of impartiality, free from mob pressure. Swift, uncompromising action against these perpetrators will reinforce that law prevails over lawlessness, protecting the independence of judges and ensuring justice remains accessible and fearless for all.
English 
Bengali