.

The execution of two Bangladeshi nationals in Saudi Arabia on 14 October 2026 has generated controversy, particularly over allegations that they were punished for adultery or kissing inside a mosque in Mecca.

However, available evidence reveals important differences between official statements, media reports and social media claims.

What Is Confirmed?

Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior announced the execution of Nazrul Islam Abdul Basir and Siti Akhtar, both Bangladeshi nationals.

The ministry stated that they were convicted of committing an unspecified indecent act inside a mosque in Mecca. Their death sentences were imposed under ta’zir, a form of discretionary punishment in Islamic jurisprudence.

The ministry also stated that the sentences received judicial approval and royal authorisation before being carried out.

However, these are official accounts of the judicial process, not independent verification of the alleged misconduct.

What Is Reported but Not Fully Established?

Bangladeshi media reported that Saudi prisoner records listed adultery among the allegations against Siti Akhtar, while Nazrul Islam was recorded under a cybercrime-related offence.

These reported records do not explain how the separate allegations relate to the mosque incident cited by Saudi authorities.

Bangladesh also confirmed that its diplomatic representatives had not been informed beforehand of the death sentences and executions.

The complete court judgments and evidence have not been made publicly available.

Which Claims Are Unsupported?

Social media reports alleged that the individuals were newlyweds executed because the husband kissed his pregnant wife’s abdomen inside a mosque.

There is no credible evidence supporting this story.

Fact-checkers established that a widely circulated photograph actually showed an Egyptian couple in 2024, unrelated to the executions.

Furthermore, Nazrul Islam’s father reportedly stated that his son was unmarried and did not know the woman.

Claims that the two were married, that kissing was the offence or that viral videos depict their executions should therefore not be presented as established facts.

Islamic Law and Human Rights

Islamic jurisprudence recognises unlawful sexual intercourse, or zina, as a serious offence, but establishes strict evidentiary requirements for its prosecution.

The Saudi authorities, however, described these sentences as ta’zir punishments rather than explicitly identifying them as fixed adultery penalties.

International human rights standards restrict capital punishment to the most serious crimes involving intentional killing. Executions for consensual sexual conduct would fall outside those standards.

Nevertheless, without the court judgments, the precise legal basis and evidence in this case remain uncertain.

Conclusion

What is established is that Saudi Arabia executed two Bangladeshi nationals following convictions for an unspecified indecent act inside a mosque. What remains unproven is that they were a married couple executed simply for kissing or committing adultery.

The controversy highlights the need for Saudi Arabia to disclose the precise charges, supporting evidence and judicial reasoning.

Where human life is at stake, justice demands not only lawful procedures but also transparency, accountability and public confidence in the fairness of the process.

Ta’zir means a punishment determined by judicial or state authority rather than a specific punishment fixed in Islamic religious texts.
It is also important to note that most Islamic scholars differ over whether ta’zir can legitimately extend to the death penalty.