Husband in Bangladesh Responds To Divorce By Throwing Acid In Face Of Ex-Wife, Serves Only One Year In Jail, And Blinded Ex-Wife is Then Coerced Into Remarrying Him

We have another chilling tale of the plight of women in some traditional Islamic areas. A woman known as Nurbanu had divorced her husband when she found him in bed with another woman. The husband than responded to the divorce by throwing acid in her face — an all-too-common crime against women in the Middle East. The woman was disfigured and blinded, but the husband received only one year of jail for the crime. Nurbanu said she was then coerced to remarry him and he now allegedly continues to beat her. Warning the picture below is graphic and disturbing.


The husband was hidden for almost a year by friends and family until authorities located him. However, his mother had him released on bail so he spent just 12 months in jail for the heinous crime.

The 36-year-old mother is left with horrific facial injuries. She is now blind and unable to even prepare a meal for herself.

There are thousands of such cases in the region, as we have previously discussed.

Source: News

32 thoughts on “Husband in Bangladesh Responds To Divorce By Throwing Acid In Face Of Ex-Wife, Serves Only One Year In Jail, And Blinded Ex-Wife is Then Coerced Into Remarrying Him”

  1. jill nace.

    wow! that is loaded with litigating, and mitigating circumstances. but judges know judges as well as the judge knows the defendant. they are elected and come from the same source to get votes. though some judges can still give a fair hearing. the judge may have said that he was a friend to let it be known for a myriad reasons, or just being stupid.

    it also depends on who’s lying. all parties lie in court. it’s human nature.
    I had friends that would do any thing not to pay a dollar and spend twenty to fifty dollars not to pay off the dollar where no litigation was involved. some of them are pretty funny to think of what stories they came up with. but I don’t know of anybody that will listen to your story with out charging you. the story that you gave is wide open depending on how much money you have for an attorney. so the next etc. question is, does the attorney know the judge.

    DO NOT GO TO COURT AND LIE. just because o.j. simpson got away with murder in the court room does not mean that o.j. will not be punished for it when he dies. but I know that if you tell the truth some judges will think it is crazy. some people can’t handle the truth and will do anything to win. check with your states attorney general first. then be smart.

  2. Kharma is one thing that the husband will not be able to escape. While not as timely as we would sometimes like, its is in the end, complete.

  3. George Zimmerman has received two new judges at his lawyer’s request. The first recused herself due to perceived conflict of interest. The second was recused by the Court of Appeals. But Zimmerman is the defendant. It might not be something available to the prosecution.

  4. Jill, sounds like a conflict of interest. perhaps the prosecutor could ask for a different judge citing the conflict of interest? I’m not a lawyer so don’t really know.

  5. Hello,

    I don’t know where to find the answer to my question. Forgive me for using this forum for that purpose.

    When a judge presides over a case in which a defendant, who the judge has said publicly is his friend, is he violating any code of judicial misconduct?

    Thank you.

  6. Since the woman is unable to care for herself, remarrying her abuser was probably intended to hold him accountable for her. She gets some care and more abuse.

  7. Yeah, I should have been a bit clearer about that part. Divorce did not protect women from abusive husbands but was presented as a way of preventing the ultimate, death, sentence by exposure and starvation. It was not a good trade off.

    Much the same for the OT commandment that a man must marry his brothers widows in the event of his brothers death. It saved the woman from being cast out on her own. I assume the part about having children by her was tossed in because it meant more sex for the guy but it probably increased her security since her new husband had a vested interest in supporting her as part of his new family.

    Me personally? I’d rather go to hell than marry either of my two brothers wives! 😀

  8. Dear Frankly, prohibitions against divorce may have been claimed as a protection for women but women have never been protected in such societies. Women remain targets of male rage and sport where religion is strong and female economic power is weak. Consider the societies wherein very restrictive travel and dress rules keep women virtual prisoners–like our “friend ” Saudi Arabia.

    Women in the US need to consider what they will continue to allow in this country as the power of misogini grows and flourishes. It is a threat not just to women. It is a threat to a stable and free society.

  9. This happened in America in NY City in a catolic neighborhood in 1896 where the outrage was that the woman had gone to Maryland to get a divorce. Did I say “1896”? No, 1966. No, it was Cardinal Ritter in 2006 from Saint Louis. He wears a red dress and approves the porking of children by his subordinate priests. Lions and tigers and bears, Oh MY!.

  10. OS – I remember seeing a comic doing a routine about his grandparents. My favorite line was one where he said his grandfather excusing some bad behavior with “Well, thats the way we did it in the old country.” And the comic saying “Yes gandpa and thats why in the old country so many men died from blunt force trauma in their sleep!”

  11. This guy should always keep one thing in mind. He has to sleep sometime.

    I have lost track of the number of murder and assault cases I have worked where the wife exacted revenge while her abuser was taking a nap.

  12. Hey! I’m sure he still loves her! Even with a hideously disfigured face.

    Seriously though in many societies a single woman has no chance. Prohibitions against divorce actually protected women from being tossed out on the street with no way to support themselves as there were no jobs available for women (well, except for perhaps the oldest profession). Despite advances in most of the industrialized world that allow women to have lives outside wife and mom there are still plenty of places where the 19th century is too modern. I don’t think there is a damn thing we can do about this sort of thing except point it out and condemn it, until these societies want to grow up there will always be men like this.

Comments are closed.