Section 2(N)
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 2(N)
Penal Code
Section 375—Mere penatration is sufficient to constitute rape.
It has been settled by so many decisions of the apex courts of this region
that even complete penetration is not essential to constitute rape and even
partial penetration with or without emission of semen and rupture of hymen
is sufficient to constitute rape. It may be mentioned here that section
2(N) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995 has explained
‘rape’ thus: “ধর্ষণ” শব্দটি Penal Code (Act
XLV of 1860)-এর section 375 এ উল্লেখিত “rape”
শব্দটির ন্যায় একই অর্থ বহন
করিবে।” According to section 375 of Penal Code mere
penatration is sufficient to constitute rape.
Syed Sajjad Mainuddin Hasan @ Hasan -Vs.- The State (Criminal) 9 ALR (AD)
189-212
|
Syed Sajjad Mainuddin Hasan @ Hasan -Vs.- The State |
9 ALR (AD) 189 |
sections 4 and 10
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000;
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
sections 4 and 10
The law is well settled that there must be some circumstances of a
compelling nature together with prolonged custody which would merit
consideration for commutation. ...Anowar Talukder Vs. The State,
(Criminal), 17 SCOB [2023] AD 69
....View Full Judgment
|
Anowar Talukder Vs. The State |
17 SCOB [2023] AD 69 |
sections 4 and 10
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000;
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
sections 4 and 10
The condemned prisoner has been languishing with the agony of death in the
condemned cell for almost 18 years not due to any fault of his own. That
being the situation, the fact of prolonged incarceration together with the
discussion that we made above fortified with the recently passed decision
of this Division can be considered as a mitigating circumstances and for
that reason we are inclined to modify the order of sentence and commute the
sentence of death to that of imprisonment for life. ...Anowar Talukder Vs.
The State, (Criminal), 17 SCOB [2023] AD 69
....View Full Judgment
|
Anowar Talukder Vs. The State |
17 SCOB [2023] AD 69 |
Section 4
|
Prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt–
Upon considering the entire materials on record and the evidence of all the
12 (twelve) prosecution witnesses, and considering the circumstantial
evidence that the accused was found present at the house upon setting fire
on the person of the victim and he was caught red handed and tied up by the
local people immediately after the occurrence and handed over to the
police. This speaks a volume about the prevailing circumstances as
perceived by the people of the locality. Appellate Division holds that the
prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt and
the High Court Division did not commit any illegality in passing the
impugned judgment and order and, as such, it does not call for any
interference. .....Mahbubul Alam (Md) =VS= State, (Criminal), 2022(2) [13
LM (AD) 300]
....View Full Judgment
|
Mahbubul Alam (Md) =VS= State |
13 LM (AD) 300 |
Sections 4 and 10
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000
Sections 34
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Sections 4 and 10
The Code of Criminal Procedure
Section 35A
Sentences in respect of similar nature of offences are changed by the
Nari-O-Shishu Ain of 2000, therefore, our judicial conscious pricks when
under the previous Ain, 1995–– The condemned prisoner has been
languishing with the agony of death in the condemned cell for almost 18
years not due to any fault of his own–– Under the previous Ain, 1995
sentence of death is the only punishment for an offence under sections 4
and 10 of the Ain, but subsequently Ain, 2000 made provisions for
imprisonment for life for the same offence. But the petitioner have been
convicted and sentenced to death. With the repeal of Ain of 1995, the
sentences prescribed therein in respect of similar nature of offences are
changed by the Ain of 2000, therefore, our judicial conscious pricks when
we note that under the previous Ain, 1995, no option other then sentence of
death was available to the court.
The condemned prisoner has been languishing with the agony of death in the
condemned cell for almost 18 years not due to any fault of his own.
––The Criminal Review Petition No. 03 of 2020 is dismissed. The
sentence of death of the petitioner, Anowar Talukder is commuted to
imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Taka 50,000/- (fifty
thousand), in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 (five) years
more. He will get the benefit of section 35A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure in calculation of his sentence and other remission as admissible
under the Jail Code. .....Anowar Talukder =VS= Deputy Commissioner,
Madaripur, (Criminal), 2023(1) [14 LM (AD) 321]
....View Full Judgment
|
Anowar Talukder =VS= Deputy Commissioner, Madaripur |
14 LM (AD) 321 |
Section 6 (2)
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 6 (2) r/w
Evidence Act
Section 114 (g) —Criminal Trial (Benefit of Doubt)
No independent witness was examined, no neighbouring witness was examined,
one witness stated that he could not say which clothes were worn by the
accused,later stated that the accused wore pant and shirt, another witness
stated that accused wore lungi and gangi, no sign of rape was there while
the victim was examined by the doctor, the seized clothes were not sent for
examination, the victim's two children were old enough to give evidence in
support of the prosecution case, but were not cited in the charge-sheet nor
produced as witnesses, Appellate Division held that the prosecution failed
to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt, and the accused is entitled
to get benefit of doubt.
The Appellate Division observed that it appears that in all 9 PWs were
examined on behalf of the prosecution. Among them no independent witness
was there, all are interested witnesses. And no neighbouring witness was
also examined in this case. PW2 Md. Fazlur Rahman stated that he could not
say which clothes were worn by the accused. Again he said that the accused
was wearing pants and shirt at that time. But PW3 Md. Mokbul Hossain stated
that accused Amzad wore lungi and gangi at that time. This contradiction
being a vital one was not considered by the Courts be-low. Moreover, no
sign of rape was there while the victim was examined by the doctor.
Investigation officer PW9 himself admitted that the seized clothes were not
sent for examination. PW-6 Md. Jahirul Islam was declared hostile for not
supporting the prosecution case. The victim’s two children were old
enough to give evidence in support of the prosecution case, but were not
cited in the charge sheet nor produced as witnesses in the case and no
explanation was given for their non-production. As such Appellate Division
is of the opinion that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond all
reasonable doubt, and the appellant is entitled to get benefit of doubt.
Thus the appeal is allowed.
Amzed Hossain Dulal. -Vs.- The State. (Criminal) 9 ALR (AD) 216-219
|
Amzed Hossain Dulal. -Vs.- The State |
9 ALR (AD) 216 |
Section 6(4)
|
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section 35A
Nari O Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishes Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 6(4)
Modified sentence with get the benefit of section 35A of the Cr.PC.– It
is found that the appellant Anowar Hossain has been in the condemned cell
for more that 22 (twenty two) years suffering the pangs of death. There are
numerous decisions of this Division which shed light on this aspect. In
general terms, it may be stated that the length of period spent by a
convict in the condemned cell is not necessarily a ground for commutation
of the sentence of death. However, where the period spent in the condemned
cell is not due to any fault of the convict and where the period spent
there is inordinately long, it may be considered as an extenuating ground
sufficient for commutation of sentence of death. The appeal is dismissed
and the sentence of the appellant is commuted to imprisonment for life and
to pay a fine of Tk.5,000.00, in default, to suffer imprisonment for
15(fifteen) days more. The appellant shall get the benefit of section 35A
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 and remission as per law. ...Anowar
Hossain =VS= The State, (Criminal), 2021(2) [11 LM (AD) 150]
....View Full Judgment
|
Anowar Hossain =VS= The State |
11 LM (AD) 150 |
Section 6(3)
|
In sub-section (3) of section 6 of the Ain of 1995, if similar offence is
committed by more than one person all of them will be sentenced to death.
Suppose 5 persons are involved in the commission of the crime of them two
directly participated in the commission of rape and other three persons
abeted the offence. If these three persons are sentenced to death with
other two, it will be contrary to norms and the sentencing principles being
followed over a century. …BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others,
(Civil), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 286]
....View Full Judgment
|
BLAST & others =VS= Bangladesh & others |
1 LM (AD) 286 |
Section 6(4)
|
Sentence of death commuted to life imprisonment–
The High Court Division committed serious error of law in discarding the
confessional statement and the finding that ‘the confessional statement
of the condemned prisoner is neither voluntary nor true and it is liable to
be rejected as a whole’ is also erroneous and as such the order of
acquittal of the accused respondent herein is thus also erroneous and
illegal. This criminal appeal is allowed. But the sentence of death passed
by the trial Court is commuted to life imprisonment relying on the
principle laid down in BLAST Vs. Bangladesh(67 DLR(AD)185). .....The State
=VS= Haris, (Criminal), 2018 (1) [4 LM (AD) 517]
....View Full Judgment
|
The State =VS= Haris |
4 LM (AD) 517 |
Sections 6 (1)/14
|
In the facts of the instant case, a 13 year old house maid has undoubtedly
been raped and there is no reason why the victim, who suffered the trauma
and the stigma that goes with it, should not be believed. She has put
herself in an invidious situation where she will be shunned and
marginalised for the rest of her life and yet she has been disbelieved.
This is clearly a travesty of justice. (Minority View) .....The State =VS=
Mostafizur Rahman & another, (Criminal), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 562]
....View Full Judgment
|
The State =VS= Mostafizur Rahman & another |
1 LM (AD) 562 |
Sections 6 (1)/14
|
In facts, the story of rape itself gives rise to a grave suspicion
implicating the accused, respondent; as such it will be fully within the
domain of the appellate court to acquit the accused. Moreover, the reason
of delay in lodging FIR even after the release of the victim from the
clutch of the accused has not been properly described; so it is very
difficult to consider the evidence of prosecutrix, P.W.2 as beyond any
reasonable doubt which is the fundament requirement of conviction of an
accused person(Majority View) .....The State =VS= Mostafizur Rahman &
another, (Criminal), 2016-[1 LM (AD) 562]
....View Full Judgment
|
The State =VS= Mostafizur Rahman & another |
1 LM (AD) 562 |
Section 6(1)
|
Bail of accused in a case of rape of minor girl when medical report does
not show any sign of rape - The High Court Division granted bail to the
accused in a rape case of minor girl of 4-5 years old as the medical report
does not show any sign of rape. Apex court finds nothing wrong with the
same.
State Vs. Md. Liton Miah @ Babu 13 MLR (2008) (AD) 60.
|
State Vs. Md. Liton Miah @ Babu |
13 MLR (AD) 60 |
Section 6(3)
|
While considering the police report (FRT) the Special Tribunal heard the
learned Advocates of the parties and on perusal of the record and case
diary took cognizance, of the offence after observing that a prima facie
case was made out by the prosecution but the Tribunal could not agree with
the opinion of the IO and took cognizance on the basis of the materials on
record.
Bikish Miah vs State 3 BLC (AD) 182.
|
Bikish Miah vs State |
3 BLC (AD) 182 |
Section 6(2)
|
Death is proper punishment for rape and murder-When the charge of
commission of rape and murder of victim girl is proved beyond doubt, death
is the appropriate punishment. Azad Mia alias Md. Azad Vs. The State,7 MLR
(2002) (AD) 22.
|
Azad Mia alias Md. Azad Vs. The State, |
7 MLR (AD) 22 |
Section 6(4)
|
For the offence of rape and murder, the proper sentence is death—
In case of custodial death the custodian has to explain the circumstances
under which the victim died—
When it is established that the victim was taken to the custody of the
accused in the dead hours of the night and in the following morning her
dead body was found with injuries on throat and her private parts with sign
of rape and the explanation offered being not satisfactory the sentence of
death has been held by the apex court as perfectly justified. Mainiri Haque
and another Vs. The State., 9 MLR (2004) (AD) 321.
|
Mainiri Haque and another Vs. The State., |
9 MLR (AD) 321 |
Section 6(2)
|
Nari-o-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 6(2) r/w
Penal Code, 1860
Section 375
Capital punishment–– Under section 6(2) of the Nari-o-Shishu Nirjatan
(Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995 is capital punishment only. But in a recent
judgment, this Division held that in appropriate cases, the sentence of
death may be commuted to punishment for life. But on the facts and
circumstances of the case, the condemned-appellant does not deserve any
sympathy whatsoever. In this connection reliance may be made on the case of
Laxman Naik vs State of Orissa (1994) 3 SCC 381 wherein the Supreme Court
of India confirmed the death sentence of a perpetrator for the offence of
rape followed by murder of a 7 year old girl by her own uncle. The Court
opined that the accused seems to have acted in a beastly manner. After
satisfying his lust, he thought that the victim might expose him for the
commission of offence on her to her family members and others, therefore,
the accused with a view to screening the evidence of the crime, put an end
to the life of that innocent girl. The Court noticed how diabolically the
accused had conceived his plan and brutally executed it in such a
calculated cold blooded and brutal murder of a very tender age girl after
committing rape on her which, according to the Court, undoubtedly falls in
the rarest of rare case attracting none other than capital punishment.
––The sentence of death imposed upon the condemned-appellant Md Sukur
Ali passed by the Tribunal and confirmed by the High Court Division is
maintained. .....Sukur Ali (Md) =VS= State, (Criminal), 2023(1) [14 LM (AD)
289]
....View Full Judgment
|
Sukur Ali (Md) =VS= State |
14 LM (AD) 289 |
Section 6(3)
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 6(3)
In sub-section (3) of section 6 of the Ain of 1995, if similar offence is
committed by more than one person all of them will be sentenced to death.
Suppose 5 persons are involved in the commission of the crime of them two
directly participated in the commission of rape and other three persons
abeted the offence. If these three persons are sentenced to death with
other two, it will be contrary to norms and the sentencing principles being
followed over a century. ...BLAST & Others Vs. Bangladesh & Others,
(Civil), 1 SCOB [2015] AD 1
A law which is not consistent with notions of fairness and provides an
irreversible penalty of death is repugnant to the concepts of human rights
and values, and safety and security. ...BLAST & Others Vs. Bangladesh &
Others, (Civil), 1 SCOB [2015] AD 1
A provision of law which deprives the court to use of its beneficent
discretion in a matter of life and death, without regard to the
circumstances in which the offence was committed and, therefore without
regard to the gravity of the offence cannot but be regarded as harsh,
unfair and oppressive. The legislature cannot make relevant circumstances
irrelevant, deprive the court of its legitimate jurisdiction to exercise
its discretion not to impose death sentence in appropriate cases.
Determination of appropriate measures of punishment is judicial and not
executive functions. The court will enunciate the relevant facts to be
considered and weight to be given to them having regard to the situation of
the case. Therefore we have no hesitation in holding the view that these
provisions are against the fundamental tenets of our Constitution, and
therefore, ultra vires the Constitution and accordingly they are declared
void. ...BLAST & Others Vs. Bangladesh & Others, (Civil), 1 SCOB [2015] AD
1
....View Full Judgment
|
BLAST & Others Vs. Bangladesh & Others |
1 SCOB [2015] AD 1 |
Section 6(2) and (4)
|
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), 1 SCOB [2015] AD 1
....View Full Judgment
|
BLAST & Others Vs. Bangladesh & Others |
1 SCOB [2015] AD 1 |
Section 6(4)
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bi-shesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 6(4) read with
Code of Criminal Procedure [V of 1898]
Section 164
It is an established principle of law that confessional statements, if
voluntary and true, can be the sole basis of conviction of the maker of it.
The Appellate Division observed that in the present case the confessional
statement of accused-appellant Rakibor @ Okibor alone is sufficient for
finding him guilty of the charge levelled against him. The confessional
statement of accused-appellant Ra-kibor @ Okibor has been well corroborated
also by the extra judicial confessional statements of the other accused
Helal and also by the fact that as per that confessional statements of
accused Helal some incriminating articles were recovered from the dwelling
hut of confessing accused Helal. So as regards the accused-appellant
Rakibor @ Okibor it appears that there is not only the own confessional
statement of this accused-appellant but there are other evidence also
lending corroboration to this confessional statement and all these have
proved the charge against this accused-appellant Rakibor @ Okibar beyond
all reasonable doubt. The confessional statement of accused Helal recorded
under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been argued to be
exculpatory in nature as apparently, in this confessional statement he has
made an attempt to absolve himself from the offence. But in this
confessional statement he has not denied his presence at the place of
occurrence and stated also that after commission of the offence the other
accused persons took shelter in his hut and according to this confessional
statement some incriminating articles, namely, bloodstained curtain, quilt
cover, spade and bamboo rod were recovered form his hut. Over and above
there are sufficient evidence on record to prove that soon after the
occurrence while he was trying to flee away to India he was caught by the
villagers and at that time he made extra-judicial confession in presence of
many persons stating that he himself and other accused persons including
accused-appellant Rakibor @ Okibor committed rape on the victim Morsheda
and thereafter they murdered her. This extra-judicial confessional
statement of accused Helal followed by recovery of incriminating articles
from his hut alone are sufficient to find him guilty of the charge levelled
against him. This extra-judicial confessional statement of accused Helal
and the recovery of incriminating articles from his hut prove that in his
judicial confessional statement accused Helal intentionally suppressed the
fact of his involvement in the commission of rape and murder of Morsheda to
absolve himself from punishment. Md. Rokibur @ Rokib @ Okibar -Vs.- The
State (Criminal) 2019 ALR (AD) Online 330
....View Full Judgment
|
Md. Rokibur @ Rokib @ Okibar -Vs.- The State |
2019 ALR (AD) Online 330 |
Section 8(1)
|
Morality cannot be legislated, but behaviour can be regulated. Judicial
decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.
The Appellate Division observed that the High Court Division noticed that
P.W.6 Abdul Baset is not the full brother of P.W.2, Nazma and that P.W.7,
Begum is not the mother of the victim; rather P.W.7 is the step mother of
the victim. With reference to the affidavit filed by the petitioners, the
High Court Division found that the petitioners tried to impress upon that
the victim of her own volition went to the brothel but that the said
affidavit was neither properly exhibited nor was it filed in the trial
Court and that the victim denied making any affidavit. The High Court
Division having considered the evidence of doctor, P.W.9 and the medical
report, exhibit-1 found that the age of the victim was about 17 years on
the date of her examination and that the victim in her evidence claimed
that she was about 13 or 14 years old. The finding of the doctor as to age
is belied by the fact that his report shows the taking place of menarche
one year back. In context of development of girls in Bangladesh the age
stated by the victim would be more commensurate with menarche having
started one year previously. The accused-petitioners having no morality
could dare to sell the victim-P.W.2, Nazma to a brothel. They were
convicted under section 8(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan)
Ain,1995 and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life. The order of
conviction and sentence was rightly affirmed by the High Court Division.
Accordingly, criminal petition for leave to appeal is dismissed.
Sukur Mahmood and others. -Vs.- The State (Criminal) 8 ALR (AD) 144-147
|
Sukur Mahmood and others. -Vs.- The State |
8 ALR (AD) 144 |
Section 9(ka)
|
Offence of immoral act punishable under section 9(G)—
Taking nude photographs of victims by force for the purpose of black
mailing is highly immoral act.—
When major charge of rape fails accused may be punished for minor offence
of immoral act. No observation on extraneous matter not relevant to the
merit of the case should be made in the Judgment against outsider.
In a case charge of rape when fails, the accused who took nude photographs
of the victim by force may well be punished under section 9(G) of the 1995
Ain when such a highly immoral act Is proved beyond doubt though no charge
was framed therefore. Since the accused were fully aware of the details of
the occurrence and cross examined the prosecution witnesses on this point,
such conviction is perfectly maintainable as no prejudice was caused to the
accused. Rajib Kamrul Hassan and three others Vs. The State, 6 MLR (2001)
(AD) 70.
|
Rajib Kamrul Hassan and three others Vs. The State, |
6 MLR (AD) 70 |
Section 10(1)
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain,1995
Section 10(1) r/w
Cr. PC
Section 173 —The Appellate Division observed that the High Court
Division rightly found that the alleged demand of dowry by the accused Md.
Abu Taher from Shafali Begum and the case of the prosecution that the
accused Md. Abu Taher murdered his wife Shafali Begum on demand of dowry
have not been proved at all by any evidence. In the circumstances the High
Court Division rightly found that this case did not come within the ambit
of section 10(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain,
1995. However, the High Court Division, on pointing out some facts and
circumstances including marks of injuries on the dead body of Shafali Begum
and the postmortem examination report and the admitted fact that Shafali
Begum met her unnatural dead at the house of her husband accused Md. Abu
Taher, sent back the case to the court below for the purpose of fresh trial
under the Penal Code provided the cognizance Magistrate himself, on
consideration of the police report submitted under section 173 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, finds ingredients for taking cognizance of the case
against the accused under the Penal Code.
The State -Vs.- Md. Abu Taher. (Criminal) 14 ALR (AD) 60-63
|
The State -Vs.- Md. Abu Taher |
14 ALR (AD) 60 |
Section 10(1)
|
Punishment for murder of wife for dowry-Circumstantial evidence can well be
relied upon—
Husband when living with wife in the same house has to explain as to how
his wife is murdered. Failure to offer satisfactory explanation points to
the guilt of the accused husband. When inmates of the house of the accused
do not come to support the prosecution case, circumstantial evidence can
well be relied upon to base the conviction. In the case of murder of wife
for dowry sentence of death is the appropriate sentence.
Abdul Matleb Howlader Vs. The State— 5 MLR(2000) (AD) 362.
|
Abdul Matleb Howlader Vs. The State |
5 MLR (AD) 362 |
Section 10(1)
|
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishes Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 10(1)
Evidence Act, 1872
Section 106
Penal Code, 1860
Section 302
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section 35A
Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972
Article 105
Demand of dowry by the petitioner father of the deceased Aklima has not
been established by any reliable evidence— Sentence of death under
section 10(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain,
1995 is set aside. He is convicted under section 302 of the Penal Code and
sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life— After recording the evidence
of the prosecution witnesses and on consideration of the same along with
other materials on record the learned Judge of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan
Daman Bishes Adalat found the petitioner Raju Ahmed guilty of the charge
and thereby awarded death sentence to him under section 10(1) of the
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishes Bidhan) Ain, 1995 by the judgment and
order dated 26.06.2002 passed in Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Case No.218
of 1997 arising out of Nawabganj Police Station Case No.3(1)97. —After
hearing the parties and on consideration of the materials on record and the
evidence of the witnesses the High Court by the judgment and order dated
12.02.2006 accepted the death reference and dismissed the criminal appeal
and jail appeal filed by the appellant-petitioner.
Being aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment and order dated 12.02.2006 passed
by the High Court Division the petitioner forwarded a jail petition through
Senior Jail Super, Central Prison, Dhaka to the learned Registrar of this
Division which was registered as Jail Petition No.8 of 2010. This Jail
Petition No.8 of 2010 was taken up for hearing along with Civil Appeal
No.116 of 2010, Criminal Petition No.374 of 2011 and Jail Petition Nos.18
of 2008, 3 of 2009, 1 of 2010, 16 of 2010, 2-3 of 2011, 5 of 2012 and 7-8
of 2012. Ultimately by the impugned judgment dated 05.05.2015 this Division
dismissed the Jail Petition No.8 of 2010 filed by the petitioner and
allowed the civil appeal in part and disposed of Criminal Petition No.374
of 2011, Jail Petition Nos.18 of 2008, 3 of 2009, 16 of 2010, 2-3 of 2011.
But other Jail Petition being Nos.1 of 2010, 5 of 2012 and 7-8 of 2012 were
directed to be heard separately.
In the absence of any explanation by the petitioner in this case the High
Court Division as well as this Division rightly arrived at the conclusion
to make the petitioner liable for killing his wife Aklima. But so far the
findings relating to demand of dowry by the petitioner from the father of
deceased Aklima has not been established by any reliable evidence and as
such Appellate Division is unable to agree with the same. Accordingly the
judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed under section 10(1) of
Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishes Bidhan) Ain, 1995 is liable to be set
aside and the petitioner is convicted and sentenced under section 302 of
the Penal Code. —He is convicted under section 302 of the Penal Code and
sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of
Tk.1,000/- (one thousand) in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for
01 (one) month more. He will get the benefit of section 35A of the Code of
Criminal Procedure in calculation of his sentence and other remission as
admissible under the Jail Code. .....Raju Ahmed @ Raja Mia =VS= The State,
(Criminal), 2024(1) [16 LM (AD) 643]
....View Full Judgment
|
Raju Ahmed @ Raja Mia =VS= The State |
16 LM (AD) 643 |
Section 10(1)
|
The Evidence Act, 1872
Section 27
Nari-0-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995
Section 10(1)
The accused is entitled to benefit of doubt not as a matter of grace but as
of right– Appellate Division finds that the concept of benefit of doubt
is deep-rooted in every legal system for giving benefit to the accused. It
is not necessary that there should be many circumstances creating doubt. If
there is a single circumstance which creates reasonable doubt for a prudent
mind about the guilt of accused, then the accused would be entitled to the
benefit of such doubt not as a matter of grace but as a matter of right.
The Judges of the High Court Division as well as the trial Court have not
considered the material discrepancies, contradictions and omissions of
witnesses for which an error has crept in the trial Court’s judgment
resulting in the conviction of the appellants. On consideration of the
evidence, the appellants are held to be entitled to the benefit of doubt
and are liable to be acquitted. .....Ramjan Ali(Md.) =VS= The State,
(Criminal), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 545]
....View Full Judgment
|
Ramjan Ali(Md.) =VS= The State |
12 LM (AD) 545 |
Sections 13 and 14
|
Offence of kidnaping for ransom
read with
Evidence Act, 1872
Section 118- Child witness is competent when found capable of proper
understanding
Telephonic conversation recorded leading to the arrest of the accused and
recovery of the victim supported by ocular evidence can well form the basis
of conviction. The conviction and sentence based on consistent and reliable
evidence on record to the exclusion of any reasonable doubt affirmed by the
High Court Division are held by the apex court perfectly justified.
Jasimuddin and another Vs. The State 11 MLR (2006) (AD) 162.
|
Jasimuddin and another Vs. The State |
11 MLR (AD) 162 |
Section 17
|
No finding has been given by the Adalat that the FIR and the charge sheet
and the examination of witnesses under section 161 CrPC do not disclose any
offence against the petitioners under the Act or that even if those papers
disclose an offence, there is no material to connect the petitioners with
the offence alleged. Without such finding the Adalat cannot fail to take
cognizance of the offence.
Mohiuddin (Md) and others vs Md Motiur Rahman and another 50 DLR (AD) 4
|
Mohiuddin (Md) and others vs Md Motiur Rahman and another |
50 DLR (AD) 4 |
Section 24
|
Provides for appeal against conviction and sentence within 30 days.
When provisions of appeal under the special law with special limitation are
available application under section 561A Cr.P.C. for quashment of
conviction and sentence does not lie. Sharifa Begum @ Sharu Bibi Vs. The
State, 8 MLR (2003) (AD) 239.
|
Sharifa Begum @ Sharu Bibi Vs. The State, |
8 MLR (AD) 239 |