Appellate Division : (Civil) Surendra Kumar Sinha CJNazmun Ara Sultana JSyed Mahmud Hossain J Hasan Foez Siddique JJudgmentFebruary 19th, 2015.Durnity Daman Commission, represented by its Chairman, Dhaka ………….. Petitioner vsM Sahabuddin Ahmed and others ………………….Respondents” Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972 Article 102 Part -III Fundamental Rights Article 26-47A It is a settled point that a fugitive from justice is not entitled to any relief from a Court of law unless he surrenders to the jurisdiction of the Court. He cannot claim fundamental...
(From previous issue) :He submits further that the predecessor on the petitioners got order of acquittal from the charge brought against him. Against which the government preferred an appeal in which he had been abated after his death. He submits further that the departmental proceeding was also withdrawn by the concerned authority and subsequently? the concerned authority obtained the opinion as desired from the learned government pleader in respect of the service benefit of the petitioners wherein the learned pleader...
High Court Division :(Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction) AKM Abdul Hakim J SM Mozibur Rahman J Abdul Karim ………Petitioner VSState……………Opposite-Party Judgment March 13th, 2017 Nari-o-Shishu Nirjatan Doman Ain (VIII of 2000) Sections 11(Ga) and 27(1) (Kha)(Kha) The Tribunal can take cognizance of any offence in the interest of Justice even if no such recommendationis made after inquiry for Proceeding with a case. ……(10) HMA Alam, Advocate-For the Petitioner.Md Akramul Haque Baki, Advocate-For the Added- Opposite-Party No.2. Md Harun-ar-Rashid DAG with Shah Abdul Hatem...
(To be continued)10. The principle laid down in 66 DLR case clearly shows that the authority has every right to amend/ alter the service Rules to suit the need of the time and, as such, there is no illegality in preparing the impugned circular with new terms and conditions but such new terms and conditions prepared by the authority shall not be applicable to the detriment or disadvantage to the privilege that existed at the relevant time when an employee...
High Court Division :(Special Original Jurisdiction)Farah Mahbub JFarid Ahmed JJudgmentAugust 11th, 2011Shahjahan Mia (Md)……….. Petitioner vsGovernment of Bangladesh, and others …………. Respondents Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972 Article 102(2) Since the suspension order had been withdrawn by the College authority and the authority itself kept the said amount in its account, though not lawfully the amount was subsequently deposited in favour of the government by treasury challan with Sonali Bank Ltd. Petitioner is entitled to receive the balance amount which was...
High Court Division :(Special Original Jurisdiction) Naima Haider J Abu Taher Md Saifur Rahman JSalma Begum ……Petitioner vs Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary by the Secretariat, Dhaka and others …. RespondentsConstitution of Bangladesh, 1972 Article 102(2) An order to be a valid suspension order, the same must contain the period for which the incumbent shall remain suspended and such suspension order can only be issued when a disciplinary proceeding is pending. The suspension order of the petitioner neither...
(From previous issue) :Accordingly the Ministry of Education and the Directorate of Secondary and Higher Education issued the above mentioned 2 letters dated 22- 10-2013 and 30-10-2013 respectively all the process for nationalization of the said school was started from the initiation of the petitioner No. 1. But very surprisingly the writ petitioner denied his knowledge about the said process of nationalization of the said school. The petitioners for getting illegal gain filed this writ petition without considering the future...
High Court Division(Civil Revisional Jurisdiction)Bhabani PrahadSingha JJudgmentJuly 21st, 2013.Ismail Hossain…..…………………..PetitionerVsHanif Mia and others…..…………Opposite parties Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882)Section 52During pendency of a case no property can be transferred as per the provision of section 52 of the Act and that reconveyance made during pendency of a pre-emption proceeding cannot take away the right of pre-emption by the co-sharer.Golam Rabbani, Advocate-For the Petitioner.Khalilur Rahman, Advocate-For the Opposite-Parties.Judgment This Rule was issued calling upon the opposite-party No.1 to show...
(To be continued) 21. Moreso, from the materials on record it has been found that the cheque was drawn some time in 2004 and it was presented in the Bank in the month of September, 2007 i.e. beyond the period of six months from the date on which it was drawn. A cheque receiving in the year 2004, filling up the various columns later on, at the sweet will of the complainant, if presented in the Bank after a long...
High Court Division :(Special Original Jurisdiction) Md Ashfaqul Islam J Md Ashraful Kamal J Amirul Islam (Md) ……….……….Petitioner vs Commissioner of Customs Chittagong and others Respondents* Judgment March 5th, 2014. Customs Duty Assessment (Determination of Value of Import Goods) Rules, 2000 Rules 4, 5 & 7 Provisional assessment should be followed by final assessment as per Valuation Rules . ….. . (10) Md Jamal Hossain, Advocate-For the Petitioner.SM Moniruzzaman, DAG with Khairun Nessa and Purabi Saha, AAGs-For the Respondents. Judgment...
(From previous issue) :10. The learned Advocate further submits that since the respondents gave consent to supplying the gas to the petitioner’s Power Plant, their inaction to give gas connection to the petitioner’s Power Plant is also barred by the principle of promissory estoppel inasmuch as the Government is bound by its own decision and promise and accordingly, the Rule may be made absolute with the direction upon the Government to give gas connection to the petitioner’s Power Plant immediately....
High Court Division :(Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction) M Enayetur Rahim J JBM Hassan J Rabiul Islam alias Robi (Md) ………….Petitioner VsState … Opposite PartyJudgment December 11th, 2016 Code of Criminal Procedure (V of 1898) Section 561A Continuation of the proceeding will be nothing but a sheer abuse of the process of the Court and order of framing charge without sanction is illegal and without jurisdiction and, as such, the proceeding is liable to be quashed. .. …. (18) Code of Criminal...
