Civil Procedure Reform in Bangladesh: A New Era of Judicial Efficiency

In a significant move to modernize Bangladesh’s civil justice system, the government has enacted an amended Code of Civil Procedure(Ordinance No. XVIII of 2025), which is effective from May 8, 2025. The amendments aim to reduce litigation time, control costs, discourage frivolous cases, and address the backlog of pending matters, all long-standing challenges of the country’s legal system.

These amendments come on the heels of sustained advocacy by the Judicial Reform Committee, which was formed to recommend practical and institutional changes to enhance the efficiency of Bangladesh’s justice system. The committee’s inputs have been critical in shaping the current reform package, which responds directly to long-standing demands for procedural streamlining and transparency.

Bringing Technology into the Courtroom

One of the most transformative changes is the integration of digital communication into court processes. Under amended Order V, Rule 9(3), a summons can now be served via SMS, telephone call, and instant messaging, provided there is proof of delivery. This is intended to streamline case initiation and eliminate delays caused by traditional, manual modes of service.

In line with this digital shift, Order VII, Rule 1 has been amended to require the mobile numbers, email addresses, and national ID information of both the plaintiffs and defendants.

Key Substantive Changes on Initiating Complaints

Among the core amendments:

• Section 26 now mandates that all facts in a plaint must be supported by affidavit. This requirement front-loads the evidentiary burden on the plaintiff, deterring baseless litigation and encouraging thorough fact-checking before initiating a suit.
• In a related change, Section 35A has been revised to increase the compensatory costs for filing false or vexatious claims from BDT20,000 to BDT50,000.

Execution Simplified and Strengthened

• Section 56 has narrowed the protection from arrest in the execution of money decrees to only include elderly, infirm, pregnant, or breastfeeding women, replacing the previous broad exemption for “a woman.” In a related change, Section 57 titled –“Subsistence allowance by decree holders” has been repealed.
• Section 94A, a newly introduced provision, empowers courts to direct executive authorities (including law enforcement) to assist in decree execution and mandates compliance reporting, offering decree holders a more robust mechanism for enforcement.
• Perhaps the most consequential procedural shift is the removal of the requirement for separate execution suits. Under Rule 104 of Order XXI, courts can now accept execution applications within the same suit record, allowing direct execution. If met with resistance, courts are authorized to direct law enforcement to enforce possession or execution, significantly reducing delays and administrative hurdles in the enforcement process.
• Under new Rule 30A of Order XXI, the government will bear the subsistence costs for detained judgment debtors. It also allows for civil imprisonment of judgment debtors for up to six months for unpaid decrees. Partial payments, bonds, and provisions for release or re-arrest are included, ensuring flexibility and enforceability while also protecting against perpetual detention. This change eases the financial burden on decree holders and facilitates stronger enforcement of monetary decrees.

Ensuring Trial Efficiency and Finality

The reforms also tackle procedural inefficiencies:

• The number of adjournments allowed has been reduced from six to four under Order XVII, Rule 1(3), enforcing stricter case discipline.
• Under Order IX, Rule 13, a defendant may not apply to set aside an ex-parte decree more than once, helping reduce repetitive litigation tactics.
• New Order XVIII, Rule 4A allows examination-in-chief to be submitted by affidavit, streamlining trial proceedings and reducing unnecessary repetition in court.
• The amendment to Order XLI, Rule 21 bars the multiple rehearing of appeals dismissed for default or heard ex-parte, and a new provision under Order XLI, Rule 30 allows appellate courts to decide on the merits of the case if the record is complete, even when parties are absent, aiming to curb appeal-stage delays.

Additionally, courts are now mandated to specify the number of cases scheduled for full or partial hearings each day, improving case flow management and judicial accountability.