Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD)
Constitution Matter | |||
---|---|---|---|
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation | Head Note | Parties Name | Reference/Citation |
Members of Parliament are Public Servants–– |
Members of Parliament are Public Servants–– The oath that they took referred to their obligation to “faithfully discharge the duty” upon which they were about to enter. They are public servants since they held office by virtue of which they were authorized or required to perform public duty. The word “office” has been used in Articles 3 and 3D of P.O.28 of 1973 meaningfully. .....Anti Corruption Commission =VS= Md. Shahidul Islam & others, [1 LM (AD) 356] ....View Full Judgment |
Anti Corruption Commission =VS= Md. Shahidul Islam & others | 1 LM (AD) 356 |
Responsibility of the High Court as custodian |
Responsibility of the High Court as custodian of the Constitution to maintain the social balance–– It is the responsibility of the High Court as custodian of the Constitution to maintain the social balance by interfering where necessary for sake of justice and refusing to interfere where it is against the social interest and public good. View that no principle of natural justice was violated in this case. The Syndicate of the University, holding inquiry, reached the right conclusion that admission test had been vitiated by practising unfair means on a mass scale by marketing the question paper before holding examination and the University had every right to cancel the admission test and order that a fresh examination be held. Allow the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court Division and affirm the decision taken by the Syndicate of the Islamic University. .....Islamic University =VS= Farhana Akhter Liza, [5 LM (AD) 34] ....View Full Judgment |
Islamic University =VS= Farhana Akhter Liza | 5 LM (AD) 34 |
The Rule of Law–– |
The Rule of Law–– The rule of law is the foundation of a democratic society, our Constitution has given due importance to it in several articles, and it has been accepted as one of the basic structures of the Constitution. Every citizen, whatever his rank or status, is subject to the laws of the land and to the jurisdiction of the courts. Without rule of law there would be anarchy. .....The State =VS= Adv. Md. Qamrul Islam, M.P & another, [1 LM (AD) 28] ....View Full Judgment |
The State =VS= Adv. Md. Qamrul Islam, M.P & another | 1 LM (AD) 28 |
Rule of law–– |
Rule of law–– Rule of law is the basic rule of governance of any civilized society. The scheme of our Constitution is based upon the concept of rule of law. To achieve the rule of law the Constitution has assigned an onerous task upon the judiciary and it is through the courts, the rule of law unfolds its contents. One of the important concept of the rule of law is legal certainty. Judicial review of administrative action is an essential part of rule of law and so is the independence of judiciary. .....BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others, [1 LM (AD) 286] ....View Full Judgment |
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others | 1 LM (AD) 286 |
Constitution Matter:–– |
Constitution Matter:–– The instant process was a policy decision involving complex economic factors. The court would be slow from interfering with the economic decisions as it has been recognized that the economic expediencies lack adjudicative decision and unless the economic decision, based on economic expediencies, is demonstrated to be so violative of constitutional or legal limits. It is the administrators and legislators who are entitled to frame policies and take such administrative decisions as they think necessary in the public interest. The court should not ordinarily interfere with policy decisions, unless clearly illegal. We do not find any violation of constitutional provision or legal limits in the instant scheme. .....BADC & others =VS= Md. Abdur Rashid & others, [1 LM (AD) 388] ....View Full Judgment |
BADC & others =VS= Md. Abdur Rashid & others | 1 LM (AD) 388 |
Constitution Matter:–– |
Constitution Matter:–– In section 11(Ka) of the Ain of 2000, it is provided that if death is caused by husband or husband’s, parents, guardians, relations or other persons to a woman for dowry, only one sentence of death has been provided leaving no discretionary power for the tribunal to award a lesser sentence on extraneous consideration. This provision is to the same extent ultra vires the Constitution. .....BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others, [1 LM (AD) 286] ....View Full Judgment |
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others | 1 LM (AD) 286 |
Constitution Matter:–– |
Constitution Matter:–– Since we hold that Sub-Sections (2) and (4) of Section 6 of the Ain, 1995 and Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 34 of the Ain of 2000 are ultra vires the Constitution, despite repeal of the Ain of 1995, all cases pending and the appeals pending under the repealed Ain shall be regulated under the said law, but on the question of imposing sentence, the sentences prescribed in respect of those offences shall hold the field until new legislation is promulgated. I hold that there was total absence of proper application of the legislative mind in promulgating those Ains, which may be rectified by amendments. In respect of section 303 of the Penal Code, the punishment shall be made in accordance with section 302 of the Penal Code. It is hereby declared that despite repeal of Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995, the pending cases including appeal may be held under the repealed Ain, while dealing with the question of sentence, the alternative sentences provided in the corresponding offences prescribed in the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 shall be followed. .....BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others, [1 LM (AD) 286] ....View Full Judgment |
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others | 1 LM (AD) 286 |
Constitution Matter:–– |
Constitution Matter:–– We would like to point out here that whenever the High Court Division grants certificate it ought to have formulated the points on which the certificate is granted containing inter alia that the case involves a question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution or that the question is a substantial one. .....BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others, [1 LM (AD) 286] ....View Full Judgment |
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others | 1 LM (AD) 286 |
Constitution Matter:–– |
Constitution Matter:–– Writ petitioners did not challenge any disciplinary action taken against them by the Inspector–General of Police. The authority did not give the directions in accordance with the Police Act or the Bengal Police Regulations or the Ordinance of 1969. The writ petitioners also did not challenge the propriety of the imposition of black marks upon them. They have challenged the embargo imposed upon them by the Police Headquarter, which directly affected their right to be considered for promotion to the next higher post. Clause (5) of Article 102 does not stand in their way of making an application under Article 102(1) of the Constitution subject to the provision of Article 45 of the Constitution. .....Bangladesh & others =VS= Md. Abdus Satter & others, [1 LM (AD) 378] ....View Full Judgment |
Bangladesh & others =VS= Md. Abdus Satter & others | 1 LM (AD) 378 |
Constitution Matter:–– |
Constitution Matter:–– A legislature lacking legislative power or subject to a constitutional prohibition may frame its legislation so as to make it appear to be within its legislative power or to be free from constitutional prohibition. Such a law is colourable legislation, meaning thereby that while pretending to be a law in the exercise of undoubted power, it is in fact a law on a prohibited field. .....Bangladesh & others =VS= Md. Abdus Satter & others, [1 LM (AD) 378] ....View Full Judgment |
Bangladesh & others =VS= Md. Abdus Satter & others | 1 LM (AD) 378 |
section 11(Ka) |
In section 11(Ka) of the Ain of 2000, it is provided that if death is caused by husband or husband’s, parents, guardians, relations or other persons to a woman for dowry, only one sentence of death has been provided leaving no discretionary power for the tribunal to award a lesser sentence on extraneous consideration. This provision is to the same extent ultra vires the Constitution. .....BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 286] ....View Full Judgment |
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others | 1 LM (AD) 286 |
Criminal contempt |
Criminal contempt and a violation of the provisions of the Constitution–
|
The State =VS= Adv. Md. Qamrul Islam, M.P & another | 1 LM (AD) 28 |
Part III of the constitution |
To invoke the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the constitution, any person aggrieved by the order, action or direction of any person performing the functions in connection with the affairs of the Republic, the forum is preserved to the High Court Division. The conferment of this power cannot be curtailed by any subordinate legislation - it being the inalienable right of a citizen. This power cannot be conferred upon any Tribunal by the Parliament in exercise of legislative power or by the High Court Division or the Appellate Division in exercise of its power of judicial review. .....Government of Bangladesh =VS= Sontosh Kumar Shaha, (Civil), 2018 (1) [4 LM (AD) 143] ....View Full Judgment |
Government of Bangladesh =VS= Sontosh Kumar Shaha | 4 LM (AD) 143 |
Chapter II of Part VI of the Constitution |
Chapter II of Part VI
|
Bangladesh =VS= Md. Ataur Rahman | 4 LM (AD) 40 |
Find any violation of constitutional provision |
The instant process was a policy decision involving complex economic factors. The court would be slow from interfering with the economic decisions as it has been recognized that the economic expediencies lack adjudicative decision and unless the economic decision, based on economic expediencies, is demonstrated to be so violative of constitutional or legal limits. It is the administrators and legislators who are entitled to frame policies and take such administrative decisions as they think necessary in the public interest. The court should not ordinarily interfere with policy decisions, unless clearly illegal. We do not find any violation of constitutional provision or legal limits in the instant scheme. .....BADC & others =VS= Md. Abdur Rashid & others, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 388] ....View Full Judgment |
BADC & others =VS= Md. Abdur Rashid & others | 1 LM (AD) 388 |
Ultra vires the Constitution |
Since we hold that Sub-Sections (2) and (4) of Section 6 of the Ain, 1995 and Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 34 of the Ain of 2000 are ultra vires the Constitution, despite repeal of the Ain of 1995, all cases pending and the appeals pending under the repealed Ain shall be regulated under the said law, but on the question of imposing sentence, the sentences prescribed in respect of those offences shall hold the field until new legislation is promulgated. I hold that there was total absence of proper application of the legislative mind in promulgating those Ains, which may be rectified by amendments. In respect of section 303 of the Penal Code, the punishment shall be made in accordance with section 302 of the Penal Code. It is hereby declared that despite repeal of Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995, the pending cases including appeal may be held under the repealed Ain, while dealing with the question of sentence, the alternative sentences provided in the corresponding offences prescribed in the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 shall be followed. .....BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 286] ....View Full Judgment |
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others | 1 LM (AD) 286 |
We would like to point out here that whenever the High Court Division grants certificate it ought to have formulated the points on which the certificate is granted containing inter alia that the case involves a question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution or that the question is a substantial one. .....BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 286] ....View Full Judgment |
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others | 1 LM (AD) 286 | |
legislative power |
A legislature lacking legislative power or subject to a constitutional prohibition may frame its legislation so as to make it appear to be within its legislative power or to be free from constitutional prohibition. Such a law is colourable legislation, meaning thereby that while pretending to be a law in the exercise of undoubted power, it is in fact a law on a prohibited field. .....Bangladesh & others =VS= Md. Abdus Satter & others, (Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 378] ....View Full Judgment |
Bangladesh & others =VS= Md. Abdus Satter & others | 1 LM (AD) 378 |