Dhaka’s safety crisis is fundamentally a matter of governance, justice, and state credibility. According to Numbeo’s 2026 Mid-Year Crime Index, Dhaka recorded a high crime score of 62.2 and a low safety score of 37.8, making it the most crime-riddled major city in South Asia. Dhaka has consistently recorded high crime rates over recent years. As the Numbeo index notes, “a continuing high level of it indicates urban insecurity rather than a spike in values.”
This rise of the urban crime scene in Dhaka is more than just a consequence of overpopulation and economic pressure. It is also indicative of a decline in policing efforts, a lack of faith in the justice system, and a loss of institutional accountability in general, particularly following years of politicization in the law enforcement and wider state sphere. As documented in The Diplomat, crime boomed even as the military and police were trying to rebuild trust in the aftermath of the political regime’s collapse, with mob violence and street crime flourishing in the absence of effective policing.
Weak Deterrence and Political Influence
Perceptions of political connections dulling accountability represent one of the most pressing issues. Deterrence fails if citizens believe that punishments are insufficient, can be avoided through influence or intimidation, or that legal procedures will be indefinitely delayed. Human rights reporting on Bangladesh has long indicated that when these institutions are politicized and individuals enjoy impunity, routine violations and a breakdown in the rule of law become systemic.
Institutional Decay in Policing and Justice
While murder and violence against women and children are increasing across the country, residents feel most insecure in the capital, as per the recent news covered by various national media. This crisis in Dhaka is also a sign of institutional insecurity in the police and judiciary system. The police are expected to investigate, arrest, and refer cases, but there is low public trust due to poor responsiveness to cases, poor investigation quality, inconsistent police enforcement, etc. Research on judicial independence in Bangladesh points out that though separation of the judiciary from the executive was constitutionally established, judicial independence is blatantly affected both in execution due to executive influence and in the face of structural weaknesses.
It’s not the law that’s an issue; it’s how it’s implemented. Public outrage is also targeted at bail decisions. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, provides for bail in all bailable offences (Section 496) and discretion in non-bailable offences, considering the gravity of the charge, likelihood of flight, and the possibility of tampering (Sections 497-499). But in most cities of the country, bail is often given very soon after arrests in serious crimes, and it’s common for those granted bail to go back to a crime scene without further investigation, giving people the impression that there’s no real point in getting caught. If big-time suspects come back on the street really soon, this appears to the public as stranger-than-fiction bail, and fosters impunity. The crisis is not that bail exists, so much as that it exists and is readily issued in serious urban offenses, while investigations and trials are lengthy, which reduces deterrence. What frustrates the public is that the process seems either too sped up or not sped up enough, or it seems like it’s not serious enough as far as the gravity of the crime is concerned. In a low-trust setting, procedural sentencing alone by the courts is seen as impunity.
A human rights-based approach to public safety is a basic right, not just an obligation, of the state’s duty to protect life, liberty, and security. The International Federation for Human Rights (FIDH) report highlights that Bangladesh’s problems with the rule of law stem from the politicization of law enforcement, the pervasive problem of corruption, the prevalence of repression and weak judicial oversight and accountability. All of which combine to erode confidence in access to justice through legal systems in favor of “mob justice” when citizens do not believe formal mechanisms are capable of addressing their needs.
Events of Recent Crime in Dhaka
Dhaka has been witnessing a disturbing surge in incidents of mugging, armed and extortion robberies and violent attacks in the past few months where some of the sharpest ones have been reported from Mohammadpur, Adabor and Motijheel rather than other parts of the city. In 2026, media accounts highlight deaths in ‘mugging’ attacks, shootings, and a surge of violence on common household items such as televisions, cars, or switching jackets, suggesting an escalation of crime activity into a public safety emergency.
The data from Dhaka Metropolitan Police reveals a total of 134 mugging cases (from January to May 2026) and 178 robbery cases (the first seven months of 2026) in the city. From February to July 2026, a total of 149 robbery incidents were reported in the capital city, and police have managed to trace the activities of 1,387 active suspects and 117 professional mugging gangs in Dhaka. Some big cases are the June 7 shooting and robbery of a money exchange businessman near Motijheel’s Shapla Chattar, the August 9 armed robbery of Tk1.21 crore from a businessman, and several snatching incidents in which the victims were dragged by bag-snatchers from rickshaws, resulting in their deaths. More than 8,000 alleged criminals were arrested in Mohammadpur and Adabor over the past 18 months or so, compared with the far fewer arrests in other towns and cities, and local residents note that there is little change in their security in those locations.
Although implementation is a challenge, the legal framework for the protection of victims and witnesses exists in Bangladesh. Section 544(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, empowers courts to take all steps necessary for the protection or security of any informant, complainant, victim, or witness and the proposed Victim and Witness Protection Act also offers protection via shelter, confidentiality, relocation, medical/counselling support and secure arrangements for victims of grave offences. Constitutionally, the right to life, liberty and legal protection (Articles 31 and 32) provides the legal framework for protection of victims and justice based on legal institutions; in addition, the right to due process and a fair trial (Article 35) also applies. Other legislation is relevant and provides reinforcement of protection in specific places. The Domestic Violence (Prevention and Protection) Act 2010 offers protection orders and legal remedies to women who are victims of domestic abuse as well as to children and Evidence Act 1872 supports the lawful testimony and administration of evidence for a criminal trial. The state already has provisions for victim protection in special laws on serious offences of torture, custodial death, violence against women and children, reflecting the fact that it treats the protection of the victim as a claim of the law itself, not a matter of state convenience or discretion.
Meanwhile, public anger is mounting against the police due to the delay in their response, the slow pace of investigation and the release of culprits on bail, rendering the legal justice mechanism ineffective as far as its time-bound nature is concerned. The discontent may lead some citizens to use violence in public to beat robbers or even to do something to try to punish the perpetrators without due process, which can cause more violence and further violate justice rather than solve the actual problem – weak and delayed enforcement.
Need for Legal and Governance Reforms
The law’s response isn’t for the public to be the ones who exercise justice. Violating due process through vigilantism defeats that process, has the potential to cause more violence and to create more rights violations. To enhance lawful protection in Dhaka, five targeted actions are essential:
(1) Time-bound trials for violent urban crimes: Establish a dedicated bench at Sessions Courts in Dhaka for cases of ‘mugging’, armed robbery, and fatal ‘snatching’ to ensure speedy disposal of the cases within 6- 9 months after charge framing.
(2) Set up investigative units based on clusters: Establish dedicated DMP investigative teams for mohammadpur–adabor, Tejgaon–Uttara, Wari-sayedabad and Gulistan. Establish Crime clusters-based DMP investigative units with publicized monthly figures of arrests, charge sheets and conviction rates against crime through thana.
(3) Reasoned bail orders in serious cases: Introduce short, written reasons on granting and failing to grant bail in mugging/robbery offences where the defendant is carrying a firearm and/or causing a death, and publish anonymised versions to enhance transparency.
(4) Implement interim measures in practice: shelter, confidentiality, relocation & secure testimony – for victims and witnesses of grave offences in Dhaka, pending enactment of national Victim and Witness Protection Act.
(5) Civilian oversight dashboard: Start a Dhaka Metropolitan Police performance dashboard on response time, case clearance and bail-to-conviction ratio and place it under the review of a civilian oversight panel every 3 months.
The rise in the number of crimes in Dhaka can be more easily understood in the context of lack of confidence in law enforcement, institutional weakness and political influence. Arrest does not always translate into worthwhile investigation, equitable bail decisions and swift sentences in accordance with the law. But if those connections don’t work, then urban crime will chase away people’s trust.
