Act/Law wise: Judgment of Supreme Court of Bangladesh (AD & HCD)
Santrash Birodhi Ain, 2009 (XVI of 2009) (সন্ত্রাস বিরোধী আইন, ২০০৯) | |||
---|---|---|---|
Section/Order/ Article/Rule/ Regulation | Head Note | Parties Name | Reference/Citation |
Sections 6/8/9/10/13 |
Santrash Birodhi Ain, 2009 (as amended in 2013)
|
Deputy Commissioner, Chattogram =VS= Md. Mir Ibrahim | 14 LM (AD) 314 |
Sections 8 and 9 |
There is nothing within the four corners of the police report or in the other of the court that this mandatory provisions have yet been complied with to proceed with the trial against the accused-petitioner on the basis of the police report available in the record. The State vs. Md. Shakhwat Hossain (Mohammad Anwarul Hague J) (Criminal) 11 ADC 869 |
The State vs. Md. Shakhwat Hossain | 11 ADC 869 |
Sections 8/10/11/12/13 |
Bail– Interfered by the Appellate Division– It reveals from the impugned judgment that the High Court Division in granting bail to the accused-respondent did not at all take notice of the above confessional statement made by him as well as the factum of recovery of incriminating materials from his exclusive possession. The impugned judgment appears to be mechanical one and thereby the High Court Division has committed serious error and illegality in granting bail to the accused-respondent at this stage. Thus, the judgment and order of the High Court Division is liable to be interfered. .....The State =VS= Mufti Ibrahim Khalil(Md.) , (Criminal), 2022(1) [12 LM (AD) 509] ....View Full Judgment |
The State =VS= Mufti Ibrahim Khalil(Md.) | 12 LM (AD) 509 |
Court must not only view the rights of the accused but also the rights of the victims of the crime and the society at large while considering the prayers. An overgenerous infusion of constrains and conditions are not available in the guidelines indicated by this Division in aforementioned cases. The State vs. Mirza Abbas (Hasan Foez Siddique J) (Criminal) 11 ADC 822 |
The State vs. Mirza Abbas | 11 ADC 822 |