The Practice of Rule of Law in Criminal Justice System: A Criminological Study of Bangladesh Shammem

: The criminal justice systems, including that of Bangladesh, are currently experiencing significant strain, resulting in various issues such as delays in proceedings and unequal access to adjudication. These challenges contribute to a climate of impunity and undermine the integrity of the rule of law. Therefore, the main objectives of the study are to investigate the current situation of practicing rule of law and the challenges faced by the CJS department in Bangladesh. To understanding the challenges this study based on a mixed methodology combining both quantitative and qualitative analysis. For quantitative data, the social survey method is used. On the other hand, for qualitative data Key Informants Interviews are used. This study allows for a comprehensive understanding of the issues and challenges of the rule of law in the criminal justice system of Bangladesh. In the study it is found that police refused to register case and excluded criminal name from FIR. Faulty investigation of case is common in Justice System. Trial procedure delayed for various reasons. People also create challenges by late reporting the case and destroy evidence which creates complexity also. Corruption, political pressure, power abuse, police harassment and misbehavior, unequal law enforcement is the challenges of ensuring rule of law. Both male and female justice seeker face challenges during investigation and trial. To ensure rule of law case backlogs, corruption etc. should reduce by increasing judges and officials. To overcome such challenges this study suggests training, increase budgets for equipment, and governmental and organizational help.


INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The rule of law is one of the subjects that are now being discussed the most all over the world.It is also a burning issue in Bangladesh.It refers to a nation that is run by the law and not by men or individuals (Obaidullah, 2020).The Constitution of Bangladesh emphasizes the importance of the rule of law as a fundamental principle of governance.The Constitution provides for the establishment of a democratic society based on the rule of law, and sets out the basic principles of justice, equality, and human rights (The Constitution of the People's Republic of Bangladesh, 1972)."Rule of law" means society should be ruled by law rather than men.The basics formation emphasizes three ideas: (a) government action should be governed by regulations and not above the law; (b) people should be protected from individual violence and coercion; and (c) legal detriment should only be imposed by law, not by personal will or arbitrary choice of government official (Burnay, 2018).The first is to prevent the state from abusing its power and harming citizens.Plato and Aristotle first described this role for law.Second, it protects residents' property and lives against other citizens (Bedner, 2010).Law is clearly vast and complex.Law is also being used more complexly (Islam and Oliul, 2019).Rule of law discourse is important in comparative politics and law, especially in East Asia (Ohnesorge, 2007).Constitutional debates often invoke the Rule of Law (Fallon Jr., 1997)."Rule of law" states that no free man "shall be taken, imprisoned, scorned, banished, or in any way destroyed, nor will we go or send for him, except under a valid judgment of his peers and by the Law of the country" (Islam and Oliul, 2019).A strong legal system protects citizens from big and small injustices, combat corruption, poverty, and disease.It builds equitable, peaceful, and responsible communities that respect basic rights.Judges and lawyers traditionally uphold the rule of law.However, the rule of law benefits everyone since security, rights, justice, and governance affect us all (Kovacic et al., 2022).It also demands legal equality for all, regardless of race, religion, sex, color, background, spirituality, or social, political, or economic status.But this tenet may be in risk (Islam and Oliul, 2019).
The UN Commission on the Legal Empowerment of the Poor said in 2008 that 4 billion people are still unprotected by the law, indicating that there is still a long way to go.An incompetent and morally compromised administration that feared suspicion prevented it from implementing new changes and tightening legislation (Shaikh and Malik, 2020).The main issues that might threaten the Rule of Law in a state will be assessed and identified (Islam and Oliul, 2019).Democracy ensures the rule of law in any nation.Democracy envisions rule of law.Subverting the law threatens democracy.There cannot be democracy if law is not upheld (Subramanium, 2019).
Al Faruque states that CJS protects individual rights, public safety, and criminality.These goals are achieved through identifying Bangladesh's criminal justice system's weaknesses.Lack of competence and awareness of the law and judicial system hinder rule of law.Political intervention also affects law enforcement, judicial proceedings, and justice administration.Political influence and corruption make the judicial system unfair and untrustworthy, causing public unhappiness.These issues hinder Bangladesh's criminal justice system's rule of law aspirations.The CJS of Bangladesh is struggling to apply the rule of law, affecting judicial delivery.Service delivery is poor because justice-seekers confront several impediments (UNDP, 2022).The Bangladeshi criminal justice system does not respect and recognize victims; hence they are unsatisfied.Bangladeshi victims encounter hurdles throughout the court system, including reporting, investigation, testifying, trial, and plea bargaining (Faruk et al., 2020).This study examines justice-seekers' views on CJS's rule of law enforcement.
However, this research project aims to examine the different practices of rule of law in Bangladesh's criminal justice system and their effects on justice seeker people.The study will focus on identifying the issues and challenges facing the proper and negative service delivery practices of the rule of law.The findings of this study will inform policymakers and stakeholders about the necessary reforms to improve the justice system's efficiency and effectiveness in upholding the rule of law and providing proper service delivery to justice seeker.Moreover, this research fulfills the constitutional and fundamental rights of the people upholding the rule of law.

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
This study adopts both quantitative and qualitative analysis to collect data.For quantitative data, the social survey method is used, while for qualitative data, KII are used in the field of study.A structured questionnaire telephone interview schedule is used for collecting data from the respondents.The mixed method design of this study allows for a comprehensive understanding of the issues and challenges of the rule of law in the criminal justice system of Bangladesh by combining both quantitative and qualitative data analysis.The unit of analysis of the study is response from justice seeker, police personnel, judge, lawyer and prosecutor.The respondents in the research region provide the primary data.Besides the primary data, some secondary sources of data such as journal articles, research reports, papers, books, authentic websites, etc. are used to strengthen the findings of the research.Different police stations and courts of Dhaka Metropolitan areas and Tangail district are selected as study area and people received services from the police station and court in the previous 1 years (2022) were selected as sample and telephone interviews are conducted following a structured questionnaire.
Particularly, the purposive sampling design is used to decide the sample in selected two research areas (Kafrul Police Station and Tangail Police Station).With the limitation of the field works, insufficient time, inadequate budget, lack of accessibility and resource constrain compel to wrap the sample size in 120 (N=120) service receivers from criminal justice system.This research collects data purposively from two Police Station as 58

IJIRMPS2404230737
www.ijirmps.orgWebsite: Email: editor@ijirmps.org3 data from Kafrul PS and 62 Data from Tangail Sadar PS.Statistical based computer software named SPSS has been used for this research analysis.The current study triangulates the conceptualizations of three methods linked to the rule of law using quantitative data from respondents (those seeking justice), expert opinion, and associated secondary data on rule of law challenges.

Current situation of practicing rule of law in Bangladesh
Crimes related to the case Table 1 represents the cases filing by respondents for justice where maximum cases were theft and sexual harassment.Among 127 responses of 120 respondents, theft was about 33.9% and sexual harassment were 16.5%.In addition, 10.2% case were murder, 9.4% case were fraud, 6.3% case were attempt to murder, 5.5% case were rape, 3.1% case were violence against women, 3.1% case were robbery, and 2.4% case were kidnapping.Rest of the case were disclosure of defamatory information (1.6%), car accident (1.6%), extortion (0.8%), group fighting for land (0.8%), dacoity (0.8%), wrongful confinement (0.8%), and attempt to rape (0.8%).

Time of filing the case after incident
Table 2 represents the time of filing the case where maximum respondents file the case after incidents occurred.About 16.6% respondents file the case immediately after incidents occurred.15.8% respondents file the case after 1 day, 8.3% after 2 days, 6.7% after 7 days, 5% after 14 days (after 2 weeks), 4.2% after 3 days, 2.5% after 4 days and 1.7% respondents after 6 days of incidents occurred.Rest of the respondents filed the case in the evening of the incident's day (0.8%) and after 5 days from the incidents (0.8%).

First time response of police for taking case of the respondents
Figure 2: First time response of police for taking case of the respondents Figure 2 shows that most of the respondents said police take the case first step (79.2%) when going to file the case and another 20.8% said no from the 120 respondents.

Challenges for filing the case at first step for respondents
The mean score of respondents' opinion about "Negligence in duty" is 6.36, with a standard deviation of 1.114 (Table 4), that is the large number of respondents' agreed that the police have negligence in duty.In addition, a number of respondents were complaining that police record FIR in favor of Criminal.However, the item "Record FIR in favor of Criminal" is in second priority with mean 4.32 and a standard deviation 1.108.It can only share a 91.6% variation of the police negligence in duty.In addition, communality for the "Record FIR in favor of Criminal" is 0.895, which is explaining that it can share 89.5% variation of police record FIR in favor of Criminal.The third priority area to reduce challenges during case file at first step is "Corruption or taking bribe".Moreover, a number of respondents claiming about police misbehavior with mean 4.20 and standard deviation of 1.080 which is explaining that it can share 86.4% variation of respondents' face challenges during first step case file.Though fewer respondents have a complaint that they were faced both "Unfriendly police behavior" and "Harassment" with mean value 4.12 and standard deviation 1.080.Many of the respondents said there are challenges during case file like unfriendly behavior of the police.The communality for "Unfriendly police behavior" is 0.885, that is, which sharing 88.5% variation and the item "Harassment" which have communality 0.814 with the variation of 81.4% during the respondents' face challenges during first step case file.Few respondents complaining about "Police refuse to record case", sharing 78.9% variation for 0.789 communality during file case at first step.
One of the main challenges facing police organizations in upholding the rule of law is police misconduct and abuse of power (Manning, 1977) which are highlight the findings of this study.In addition, Johnston (2014) said about undermine public trust and confidence in his study.According to Hossain (2019) and Manning (1977), there are challenges like monetary demands on complainants and corruption (similar to the findings of this study) at every stage of a criminal case has made it difficult for people to access justice.

Police action after filing case
28.3% said police didn't do it.51.7% said police conducting search and seizer and rest 48.3% said police not conducting search and seizer.54.2% said that police interrogate the witness where 45.8% said didn't interrogate the witness.50.8% respondents said police visited the crime scene and 49.2% said police not visited the scene.54.2% respondents said that police record witness or informants' statements in their case where 45.8% respondents said no to record witness statements.
According to the Code of Criminal Procedure (1898) police should take the action after receiving the case like searching suspects (Section 51), seizure of property (Section 102), statements and confessions (Sections 161 and 164).According to the Evidence Act, 1872 securing the crime scene and recording statements from the suspect.All the above role of police are similar to the findings of this study represent the police action after filing the complaint or case.Figure 3 shows that maximum respondents think police investigating the case properly (58.3%)where rest 41.7% think police didn't investigate the case properly.According to the Bangladesh Police Act (1861), under section 14 of the act allows police to detect and investigate crimes.They can gather evidence, record witness accounts, and conduct other crime-prevention efforts.Result of this study also similar to act that maximum respondents thought police investigating the case properly..000

Status of proper police investigation
Table 7 represents the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure (KMO) for the study.The KMO value for measuring the factors of reasons of not conducting investigation properly about this study is 0.854 (>0.60), which indicates that the sampling is adequate and acceptable to perform factor reduction.So, the factor analysis is appropriate for the data.Bartlett's Test of Sphericity statistics (798.726) is significant at 1% level of significance (p-value < 0.01).That is, it is possible to reduce the factor for Reasons of not conducting investigation properly.

Reasons for not conducting investigation properly
The mean score of respondents' opinion about "Access to law is reserved for privileged" is 3.68, with a standard deviation of 1.584 (Table 8), that is the large number of respondents' agreed with the reasons of improper investigation as access to law is reserved for privileged.Communality for the item is 0.611; that is; it can only share a 61.1% variation of the access to law is reserved for privileged.The second priority area is "Biased by defendant/criminal".Communality for the item is 0.758, that means the item sharing 75.8% variation of biased by criminal.The third priority area for reasons of improper police investigation is "IO does not properly prepare the statements".The item mean value is 3.56 with standard deviation of 1.668.

IJIRMPS2404230737 www.ijirmps.org Website:
Email: editor@ijirmps.org7 Communality for the item is 0.719, that means the item sharing 71.9% variation of IO does not properly prepare the statements.In addition, a number of respondents were complaining that IO is politically biased.However, the item "IO is politically biased" is in priority with mean 3.46 and a standard deviation 1.752.Though fewer respondents have a complaint that they were faced "Taking bribery" According to Gupta and Khandelwal (2021), reasons of improper investigation is political interference in the case.He also added corruption of police force.KII-7 and KII-6 also said about improper police investigation and biased reports are the big loopholes in CJS to ensure rule of law.KII-12 said that "…..there is a culture of corruption or bribery in the police" which are similar to the findings of the above table 8. Figure 4 shows the status of police arrest of criminal where most of the respondents said that police arrested the criminal.Among 120 respondents, 57.5% respondents said that police arrested the criminal and 42.5% said that police didn't arrest the criminal.

Reasons for not arresting
Table 9 shows maximum respondents said police didn't arrest the criminal because of criminal run away and not found enough evidence for guilty.Among 51 respondents (who said police not arrest the criminal), 56.9% said powerful person where 43.1% said no. 88.2% said criminal ran away and other 11.8% said criminal didn't run away.About 58.8% respondents said not found enough evidence for proving guilty and rest 41.2% said not found evidence for proving guilty.According to Hossain (2019), local touts and influential political figures control the officers on whom to arrest or not to arrest which are similar to this study.KII-3 focuses same that during arrest there are political pressure, superior pressure, offender's powerful position.It again added public pressure and media pressure in sensitive cases.KII-1 also said that "…..if the police want to arrest the criminal under section 54, they have to face public resistance".

Submitted report by Investigation Officer (IO)
Figure 5: Submitted report by Investigation Officer (IO) Figure 5 shows that maximum Investigation Officer submitted charge sheet.Among 120 respondents, about 63.3% said police submitted charge sheet where 36.7% respondents said IO submitted final report.Email: editor@ijirmps.org9

Getting bribe for investigation purposes
experience or efficiency but rather on prior agreements on bribe distribution, and officers who fail to make monthly payments can be transferred to less desirable locations.Though the findings of these research are relevant in few cases.About, 11.7% respondents said police getting bribe for investigation purposes.

Types of discrimination during police investigation
Table 12 represents that maximum respondent faced discrimination based on socio-economic status (82.6%) during criminal case investigation where 17.4% not faced discrimination based on socio-economic status.78.3% respondents said no to gender discrimination where only 21.7% respondents faced gender discrimination during police investigation.100% respondents said no to religious discrimination of police investigation.91.3% were not faced discrimination as different political.According to Hossain Mollah (2012) Many people in Bangladesh, particularly those living in rural areas, do not have access to the legal system.This can be due to factors such as poverty.As a result, they may not be able to effectively exercise their legal rights or obtain legal representation.Such factor is indicating to socio-economic status of the finding of this study.Figure 7 shows that maximum respondents said trial procedure were delayed.Among 120 respondents 58.3% respondents said trial procedure were delayed and 41.7% respondent said trial procedure was not delayed.According to Hossain Mollah (2011) Bangladesh's criminal justice system is overburdened.Long trial delays can affect defendants' and victims' rights which are similar to this research findings.

Reasons of delaying trial procedure
The first priority of respondents' complaining is "Absence of witnesses" with the mean score is 4.89, with a standard deviation of 0.458 (Table 13), that is the large number of respondents' agreed with the reasons of delaying trial procedure.The second priority area for reasons of delaying trial procedure is "Long special examinations by different experts".The third and fourth priority areas for reasons of delaying trial procedure are "Shortage of technical assistance" and "Politization of court".In a sequence, another items are "Inadequate budget", "Excessive case load", "Inadequate human resource" and "Insufficient infrastructural support" KII-5 mention loopholes that either the plaintiff nor the defendant is present in court on the day of trial, another date has to be fixed for trial, which slows down the trial and creates litigation pressure.This study found the following reasons of delaying trial as excessive case load (KII-12), inadequate human resource and inefficiency.A part from this KII-13 added that there are inadequate and lack of training for judicial officers.
IJIRMPS2404230737 www.ijirmps.orgWebsite: Email: editor@ijirmps.org10 Status of fair and impartial trial procedure Figure 8 shows that most of the respondents said about fair and impartial trial.About 67% respondents from 120 faced fair and impartial trial procedure in the court where only 33% faced partial trial in the court.

Difficulties Of Law Enforcement Officials for Implementing The Rule Of Law Reasons for not being fair and impartial trial
The first priority of respondents' complaining about fair and impartial trial is "Corruption by judicial officers" with the mean score is 4.55, with a standard deviation of 0.597 (Table 14), that is the large number of respondents' agreed with the reasons of not being fair and impartial trial.The second priority area is "Corruption".This item's mean of 4.53 and standard deviation is 0.599.Communality for the item is 0.679, that means the item sharing 67.9% variation of reasons of not being fair and impartial trial like corruption.The third priority area for reasons is "Absence of independent judiciary "Interference of political leaders in judiciary" is one of the factors for partial trial (mean 4.47, standard deviation 0.679, communality is 0.775).
According to Rahman and Ali (2018) Political influence and corruption have weakened the court and eroded public trust which is represents the findings of this study.This raise worries about political intervention in court judgements.A report by Transparency International corruption affects Bangladesh's judiciary.Judges have been accused of taking bribes or other misbehavior to make favorable judgements.KII-3 said, rule of law means providing equal services to all.It indicates to ensure the fair and impartial trial procedure.If it is not possible to provide equal services which may be a big reason of partial trial.

Reasons why judges can't handle the case independently
The first priority of respondents' complaining about judges' independency during handle the case is "Biasness of the judge" with the mean score of 4.50, with a standard deviation of 0.780 (Table 15), that is the large number of respondents' agreed with the reasons of judges' independency during handle the case.Communality for the item is 0.800; that is; it can only share 80% variation for the reasons of why judges can't handle the case independently as biasness of the judge.The second priority area for reasons of why judges can't handle the case independently is "Government influence".The third priority area is "Local political leaders influence on victims".The item mean value of 4.38 with standard deviation for 0.770."Bribery" and "Political pressure" are other factors for why judges can't handle the case independently in judiciary.

Problems to establish the rule of law in judiciary
The first priority of respondents' complaining about to establish the rule of law in judiciary is "Corruption" with the mean score is 4.95, with a standard deviation of 0..219 (Table 16).The second priority area for problems to establish the rule of law in judiciary is "Backlog of cases" and the third priority area is "Corrupt court staff" (mean value 4.78 with standard deviation for 0.505).Others are "Lack of resources" "Shortage of staff and equipment" (mean 4.76, standard deviation 0.430, communality is 0.849), "Partial decision" (mean 4.75, standard deviation 0.435, communality is 0.528), and "Limited access to justice" (mean 4.74, standard deviation 0.476, communality is 0.698), and "Political interference" (mean 4.72, standard deviation 0.488, communality is 0.615).
According to Hossain Mollah (2011) Touts maintain court connections, and local political leaders try to influence victims to falsely implicate innocent members of the opposing party.This study also found that there is political interference in CJS to manipulate the trial and case.KII-12 and KII-13 indicates that lack of logistic support, equipments, lack of funding and budget, huge case are under trial and the short number of judges creates problem in judiciary to ensure rule of law.Table 30 clarifies that most of the respondents were male who said police have very good behavior when they filed the case.Among 30 respondents total 53.3% male respondents have said that police have very good in behavior where only 46.7% female respondents found very good behavior from police.Among 57 respondents 56% were male who said police behavior was good during case file and rest 44% were female who said the same.Among 18 respondents 77.8% male and 22.2% female were remain neutral about police behavior during the case file.Among 13 respondents 53.8% were male and 46.2% were female and they said police behavior was bad when they file the case.From the 2 respondents, all of them were male (100%) said that police behavior was very bad when they filed the case in the police station.In 2011, the UN's Rule of Law Indicators measure police performance which include reaction to pleas for aid, and satisfaction with police response to crime complaints.According to Farzana Nawaz (2012), police officers are leading to rude and abusive behavior towards the general public.

Null Hypothesis (H0):
There is no significant relationship between police behavior during case file and the sex of the justice seeking people.

Alternative Hypothesis (H1):
There is significant relationship between police behavior during case file and the sex of the justice seeking people.So, the alternative hypothesis is rejected.So, the test statistics indicates that police behavior during case file is not vary based on the sex of the justice seeking people.Above statement indicates that, police behavior during case file to justice seeking people don't differ from male to female.There is no chance that police may further behave good or bad based on the justice seeking people's sex as male and female.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMANDATIONS Conclusions
Rule of law is the crucial element for the country and its citizen to ensure democracy and justice for all.Rule of law means each and every activity of the citizens should have under the process of law.All citizens of the country have function and responsibility to maintain and ensure it.In criminal justice system, law enforcements and practitioners as well as justice seeker people face different kind of challenges during upholding the rule of law.People face challenges from starting of the case when they file case and complaints in the police station until dis-pass the case from court.They face challenges during case filing, arresting, investigating the case, evidence collection, witness and suspect interview, in court room etc.People also create challenges by late reporting the case which may destroy evidence creates complexity to handle it.They also delay present to the court which slows down the trial procedure.There are a number of challenges to ensure rule of law as corruption, political pressure, power abuse, police harassment, police misbehavior, unequal law enforcement, lack of law enforcements and practitioners' accountability, their poor skill of case managements and dealing, poor investigative techniques, socio-economic discrimination in police and court, lawyer and prosecutors' poor skill, and case backlog in the court.political pressure and influence from higher authority also brings challenges to ensure rule of law in the country.There are many limitations fight against those challenges.Lack of police and judges are one of the main reasons to create challenges of rule of law.Lack of technical and technological training of CJS's officials, lack of financing and budget issues, lack of logistic support and equipment are the limitation to ensure rule of law.To reduce these challenges and ensure rule of law experts and justice seeker people who face all the step of criminal justice system told the way how challenges may reduce to ensure rule of law in the country.To ensure rule of law police and court officials should have free from any kind of pressure and need proper training.They should accountable and independent in their work station.The number of law enforcement official should increase and provide every kind of logistic and economic support to them for ensuring rule of law.

Recommendations
There are a lot of problems in the criminal justice system and people face different kind of challenges during their case trial.There are a number of recommendations which may help the people to get justice and ensure rule of law in the country by reducing the challenges.The suggestions are as-Ensure equality before law: Equal enforcement of law is needed and ensure access to justice for all.There should not be any difference to get justice based on the any kind of discrimination factors as gender, social, economic, and race etc. Reform law institution: Reform the law enforcing agencies and police force to rid them out of corruption.These two institutions should be well organized and scientific manner to do their work properly and lawfully.Clarify the public and institutional measures that must be taken to support the rule of law in the country.

Independent police and court needed:
The imperative is to ensure the complete independence of the judiciary and to mitigate any potential biases stemming from law enforcement agencies.Additionally, it is crucial to establish a clear and distinct separation between the judiciary and the executive branch.Accountability: The assurance of police accountability is a matter of paramount importance.The imperative of ensuring transparency and accountability within the judiciary necessitates diligent efforts.In order to ensure IJIRMPS2404230737 www.ijirmps.orgWebsite: Email: editor@ijirmps.org14 the preservation of accountability within the criminal justice system (CJS), it is imperative to establish a monitoring cell and oversight body that is specifically designed to oversee the activities of CJS officials.

Figure 1 :
Figure 1: Police station where respondents filled case

Figure 3 :
Figure 3: Status of proper police investigation

Figure 4 :
Figure 4: Arrest status of criminal by police

Figure 6 :
Figure 6: Getting bribe for investigation purposes

Figure 7 :
Figure 7: Status of delaying trial procedure

Figure 8 :
Figure 8: Status of fair and impartial trial procedure

Figure 9 :
Figure 9: Respondents face discrimination at the court

Table 3 :
KMO and Bartlett's Test for challenges of filing the case at first step

Table 6
represents that majority of the respondents said police investigating problems and incidents (76.7% respondents) where 23.3% said police didn't investigating the problems.55% respondents said police collected evidence where other 45% said police didn't.55.8% said that police interrogate the suspect where 44.2% said didn't interrogate the suspect.71.7% respondents said police making oral examination where IJIRMPS2404230737 www.ijirmps.orgWebsite:

Table 7 :
KMOand Bartlett's Test for Reasons of not conducting investigation properly Kaiser

Table 10 :
KMO and Bartlett's Test for Reasons of not completing the investigation at due time

Table 10 :
The KMO value for measuring the factors of Reasons of not completing the investigation at due time about this study is 0.833 (>0.50), which indicates that the sampling is adequate and acceptable to perform factor reduction.So, the factor analysis is appropriate for the data.Bartlett's Test of Sphericity statistics (416.783) is significant at 1% level of significance (p-value < 0.01).That is, it is possible to reduce the factor for reasons of not completing the investigation at due time.IJIRMPS2404230737www.ijirmps.orgWebsite:Email:editor@ijirmps.

org 8 Reasons of not completing the investigation at due time
The first priority of respondents' complaining is "Poor record preservation" with the mean score is 4.85, with a standard deviation of 0.529 (Table11), that is the large number of respondents' agreed with the reasons of not completing the investigation at due time as insufficient time.Communality for the item is 802; that is; it can only share 80.2% variation for the reasons of not completing the investigation at due time.The second priority area for reasons of police investigation delaying is "Lack of witness".This item's mean is 4.80 and communality for the item is 0.615, that means the item sharing 61.5% variation of lack of witness.The third priority area for reasons of police investigation delaying is "Lack of cooperation among member of public" with mean value 4.76 and standard deviation of 0.581.Though fewer respondents have a complaint about "Inadequate resources and technology" (with mean value 4.63 and standard deviation 0.623) and "Poor investigation techniques" (with mean value 4.59 and standard deviation 0.836).Another item is "Lack of police officer who conduct investigation or few skilled personnel on investigation" (fourth priority) with mean 4.76.According to KII-3, late reporting leads to the destruction of crime scenes resulting in gaps in evidence collection and witness gathering which are the part of investigation and reasons of delaying investigation.KII-1 added that give much less budget for case investigation.Proper logistical support and training are required for the collection and preservation of biological and physical evidence.Lack of these adequate budget and proper training may cause to delay of investigation.

Table 17 :
Cross tabulation between sex of the respondents and victim of discrimination at court

Table 29
clarifies that most of the male respondents have faced socio-economic discrimination in the court during trial.Among 18 respondents, about 77.8% male respondents and 22.2% female respondents have faced socio-economic discrimination in the court.Among 3 respondents 100% were female who have faced gender discrimination in the court.Among 18 respondents, about 77.8% male respondents and 22.2% female IJIRMPS2404230737 www.ijirmps.orgWebsite:Email:editor@ijirmps.

org 12 respondents
have faced religious discrimination in the court.Among 7 respondents, 85.7% were male and rest 14.3% were female respondents who have faced discrimination for her different political view or opinion in the court trial of the case.Islam and Oliul (2019) mentioned legal equality for all, regardless of religion, sex, political, social and economic status which indicates the findings of this research.But this tenet may be in risk.They also added equality for all based on race, color, background, spirituality.

01 Police behavior during case file varies based on the sex of the justice seeking people (Hypothetical statement).Table 18 :
Cross tabulation between police behavior during case file and sex of the respondents The calculated value is-0.314,Degrees of freedom (df) is-4, 4 Degrees of freedom at 5% level of significance, the table value is 9.488 Calculated value < Table value.We can say that at 5% significance level and 4 degrees of freedom the tabulated value of chi-square is 9.488.But calculated value is 0.314.Calculated value is lower than table value with 5% level of significance in 4 degrees of freedom.So, the null hypothesis is accepted because of calculated value is lower than table value. IJIRMPS2404230737www.ijirmps.orgWebsite:Email:editor@ijirmps.org13

Table 1 : Crimes related to the case Crimes related to the case Frequency of responses Percent
Training: Reduce incapability of the police, judges and lawyers by ensure proper training.In addition, technical and technological training should be given so that the police can properly institute Corruption reduction strategy: Strict steps to deter corruption of court staffs and police officer during handle the cases.Moreover, strict departmental action and punishment should be arranging for illegal activities.A specific and beneficiary corruption reduction strategy should have in police and court institutions.Proper investigation needed: Investigation by the police should be re-formed and confirm biasfree investigation of criminal cases.Collection and preservation of evidence should be proper and scientific for further investigative purposes.Case backlog should reduce from the court: Trial process should be completed as early as possible to reduce case backlog and delays trial procedures.Furthermore, the number of judges and speedy tribunals should be increased so that case overload is reduced.Fair appointment: Fair appointment of staffs of the court and police officer needed.Stop police misbehavior: Reduce police misbehavior and harassment with justice seeking people during case file, investigation and during trial the case.They need proper training and knowledge how to handle and behave with a victim and with citizen.Stop political interference: In order to ensure the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, it is imperative to eliminate any form of political pressure or interference within the criminal justice system during the course of legal proceedings.Need adequate budget and funding: Adequate budget need for both police and court to practice and enforce of law throughout the country.Budget need for their proper training, investigation purposes, in evidence collection and preservation, assisting to the victim and so on.Law reform and amendment: Old law should update with new concept and based on new problem.New law should amendment for ensure the rule of law.Build public awareness: Build and increase public awareness about the law and confirm that people obey the law.Media and civil society may play a vital role to increase awareness among people to obey law and help the government law institutions to ensure rule of law.ACKNOWLEDEMENTSFirst of all, I would express my deepest gratitude to almighty Allah for enabling me to complete this research paper successfully.I also want to thank Allah for providing me the fortitude and strength to work for the past few months and to finish my study before the deadline.I would like to express my gratitude to my thesis supervisor Dr. Md.Omar Faruk, Chairman and Professor, Department of criminology and police Science, Mawlana Bhashani Science and Technology University, for his invaluable patience and feedback.He generously provided knowledge and expertise to complete this thesis paper.Without the generous support from him this study would not have been possible.Further, I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all of my teachers, Department of Criminology and Police Science, for their encouragements, support and help in getting this paper done well.I would like to extend my sincere thanks to all the respondents who gave me their invaluable time, information and share their knowledge and expertise thoughts.Without their sharing information and knowledge this study could not be completed.I am also grateful to my classmates, friends, junior and senior of my department who helped me and gave moral support to complete this study.Waldron, J. (2011).The rule of law and the importance of procedure.Getting to the Rule of Law, 3, 4-5.53.World Justice Project (2022).WJP Rule of Law Index 2022.Retrieved from https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/factors/2022/Order%20and%20Security/ IJIRMPS2404230737www.ijirmps.orgWebsite:Email:editor@ijirmps.org1752.

Table 3 : Challenges for filing the case at first step
Rank is based on descending order of mean score.

Table 6 : Reasons for not conducting investigation properly Items Mea n
*Note: Rank is based on descending order of mean score IJIRMPS2404230737 www.ijirmps.orgWebsite:Email:editor@ijirmps.org20

Table 8 : Reasons of not completing the investigation at due time
Rank is based on descending order of mean score.

Table 11 : Reasons for not being fair and impartial trial
Rank is based on descending order of mean score. IJIRMPS2404230737www.ijirmps.orgWebsite:Email:editor@ijirmps.org22

Table 12 : Reasons why judges can't handle the case independently
Rank is based on descending order of mean score.

Table 13 : Problems to establish the rule of law in judiciary
Rank is based on descending order of mean score.