A perusal of regulation 68 makes it clear that the diary should contain full unabridged statement of persons examined by the police so as to give the Magistrate a satisfactory and complete source of information which would enable him to decide whether or not the accused person should be detained in custody. Section 167(1) requires that copies of entries of the diary should be sent to the Magistrate with the object to prevent any abuse of power by the police officer. .....Ministry of Law, Justice & Parl. Afrs. =VS= BLAST, (Civil), 2017 (2)– [3 LM (AD) 274] ....View Full Judgment

It has been said in PRB No.68(b) that a person not being a Police-Officer can also go through the case diary on being empowered by the Superintendent of Police Every Police Officer shall keep his case-diary in proper care and custody and shall consider it a very secret and confidential document till final disposal of an appeal or a revision pending before Courts. .....Ministry of Law, Justice & Parl. Afrs. =VS= BLAST, (Civil), 2017 (2)– [3 LM (AD) 274] ....View Full Judgment

Punishment like dismissal or removal in respect —of a police personnel like the respondent, a Sub—Inspector of Police, which can be awarded by the Inspector General of Police, can also be awarded under regulation No. 858 (a) (2) by the Superintendent of Police. Government of Bangladesh and others vs Md Sharfuddin Mollah 54 DLR (AD) 120. ....View Full Judgment

The Administrative Tribunal and Administrative Appellate Tribunal held that Rules 858 and 884 of the PRB did not empower the Additional Inspector General of Police to review earlier order of punishment awarded by the competent authority to any Sub Inspector and inflicted major penalty.
Government of People's Republic of Bangladesh, -Vs.-Md. Nurul Islam. 4 ALR (AD) 2014 (2) 88 ....View Full Judgment

Black Mark–
The petitioner for submitting false investigation report with intent to save the accused persons for illegal gain. the petitioner was charged under Rule 861 of the Police Regulations, Bengal (P.R.B.) and after completing a departmental proceeding, major penalty of “Black Mark” was imposed on 17. 08.2009. .....Govt. of Bangladesh & others =VS= Ranjit Krishna Mazumder (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 370] ....View Full Judgment

Case diary–
Learned Attorney General submits that the High Court Division has not considered the Police Regulations of Bengal while making observations relating to case diary and submits that under the Police Regulations of Bengal the court or any other person is not authorized to look into the case diary in view of G.O. No.P.8C-5/60(III) 34PI, dated 16th January, 1961. .....Ministry of Law, Justice & Parl. Afrs. =VS= BLAST, (Civil), 2017 (2)– [3 LM (AD) 274] ....View Full Judgment