A Bangladeshi living abroad may file an application under Article 102 of the Constitution if the person has the necessary standing and a legally reviewable grievance. The Constitution does not require a petitioner to be physically resident in Bangladesh.
The petitioner must still comply with the procedural rules of the High Court Division. Foreign execution of affidavits, verification of documents and authority given to lawyers must be checked against current court and consular practice.
Constitutional authority to file
Article 44 guarantees the right to move the High Court Division under Article 102(1) for enforcement of fundamental rights. Article 102(1) permits the High Court Division, on the application of a person aggrieved, to give appropriate directions or orders for enforcing rights contained in Part III of the Constitution.
Article 102(2) provides additional judicial-review remedies. These include orders directing a public authority to perform a legal duty, preventing unlawful action, declaring an act without lawful authority, examining the legality of detention and requiring a person holding public office to establish the legal authority for holding that office.
Nothing in Article 102 makes residence inside Bangladesh a condition of standing. The important questions are whether the applicant is legally affected, whether the respondent is subject to Article 102 and whether the dispute is suitable for constitutional review.
Who is a person aggrieved?
In an ordinary personal case, a petitioner should normally show that a decision has affected, or imminently threatens to affect, the petitioner’s legal rights or interests.
A non-resident Bangladeshi may therefore be a person aggrieved where, for example, a Bangladeshi authority refuses or impounds a passport, makes an adverse citizenship determination, unlawfully interferes with property in Bangladesh or issues an administrative order directly affecting the person.
The requirement is not satisfied merely because the petitioner disagrees with a government policy. There must ordinarily be a genuine legal injury or a sufficient legally recognised interest.
The Supreme Court has adopted a broader approach in genuine public-interest litigation. In Dr Mohiuddin Farooque v Bangladesh, the Appellate Division recognised that a person with sufficient interest may approach the Court where a public authority has failed to perform a public duty and the affected community may not be able to seek relief itself. Later Supreme Court judgments continue to cite this principle.
Public-interest standing does not permit abstract, publicity-driven or politically theatrical litigation. The petition must identify a public legal wrong, a constitutional or statutory duty and a genuine relationship between the petitioner and the subject.
What must be prepared
The petitioner should first obtain the decision being challenged. If the authority has not issued a written decision, the petitioner should make a formal written request.
The working file should contain a complete chronology, the impugned order, all applications and representations, official correspondence, proof of citizenship or identity where relevant, and documents establishing the legal injury.
Documents written in another language should be accompanied by a reliable English or Bangla translation suitable for court use. The advocate should verify how the translation must be certified.
Article 102 proceedings are generally affidavit-based. This means the Court usually determines the matter from sworn statements, annexed documents and legal submissions rather than through a full trial with extensive oral testimony.
The petition must identify the exact constitutional or statutory provision involved. The Appellate Division has cautioned that merely using expressions such as “discrimination,” “mala fide” or “violation of fundamental rights” does not establish a constitutional case. The material facts supporting each allegation must be pleaded.
Affidavits executed outside Bangladesh
A petitioner living abroad may need to swear or affirm documents outside Bangladesh. The acceptable process may depend on the country of execution, the current High Court Division Rules, consular arrangements, notarial law and registry practice.
It should not be assumed that a foreign notarial seal alone will always be sufficient. Depending on the circumstances, execution before a Bangladesh mission, additional authentication or another recognised procedure may be required.
Ain.bd should not publish a universal foreign-affidavit checklist without obtaining current confirmation from the Supreme Court Registry. The publicly accessible official materials do not presently provide a sufficiently consolidated, country-neutral procedure to justify such a checklist.
This does not affect the constitutional right to seek relief. It is a filing and authentication issue that must be resolved before submission.
Must the petitioner use another remedy first?
Article 102(2) expressly refers to the absence of another equally efficacious remedy. If legislation provides an effective appeal, tribunal or review procedure, the High Court Division may decline to intervene before that remedy is used.
Article 102(1) is different. It concerns enforcement of fundamental rights and is connected to the guaranteed right under Article 44. In Government of Bangladesh v Sontosh Kumar Shaha, the Appellate Division explained that the alternative-remedy wording in Article 102(2) should not automatically be imported into Article 102(1).
This does not mean every statutory dispute can be converted into a fundamental-rights case. The Court will examine the substance of the claim. A petitioner cannot avoid a specialised tribunal merely by adding constitutional language to an ordinary dispute.
Article 117 also creates administrative tribunals for specified public-service disputes and restricts ordinary court jurisdiction over matters within such tribunals’ competence. Constitutional challenges involving the validity of law or a genuine fundamental-rights issue require careful analysis rather than a broad assumption that Article 102 always overrides the tribunal system.
Relevant court and representation
An Article 102 application is filed before the High Court Division of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. A person abroad should engage an advocate authorised to practise before that Division.
The correct respondents may include the Government, a ministry, department, statutory authority, local authority, tribunal or public official responsible for the decision.
Private organisations are not automatically subject to writ jurisdiction. A private body may be reviewable where it performs a statutory or public function, but the legal basis must be established.
Delay and factual disputes
Article 102 does not contain a single general limitation period for every writ. However, unexplained delay can lead the Court to refuse discretionary relief. Residence abroad does not automatically excuse prolonged inaction.
The petitioner should preserve evidence explaining any delay, including continuing representations, absence of a written decision, illness, concealment by the authority or continuing legal injury.
A writ may also be unsuitable where the dispute depends on sharply contested facts that require witnesses, cross-examination and a full civil or criminal trial.
Common mistakes
The most frequent errors are naming the wrong authority, failing to obtain the challenged decision, omitting an effective statutory remedy, submitting incomplete foreign documents and making serious allegations without evidence.
Another common error is assuming that a family member in Bangladesh can automatically litigate another adult’s private claim. The advocate must determine whether the petitioner should file personally, through an authorised representative or under another recognised legal arrangement.
Law updated as of 13 July 2026.
Primary sources: Constitution of Bangladesh, Articles 44, 102 and 117; Dr Mohiuddin Farooque v Bangladesh, 49 DLR (AD) 1; Government of Bangladesh v Sontosh Kumar Shaha, 6 SCOB (AD) 20; current High Court Division Rules and applicable gazette amendments.
Legal-information disclaimer: This is general legal information, not legal advice. Standing, maintainability and foreign execution of court documents are technical matters. Consult a licensed Supreme Court advocate before preparing or filing a writ petition.