|
Case Number
|
Parties |
Short Description |
|
201 |
Criminal Revision 1735/2019 |
ইনজামামুল ইসলাম ওরফে জিসান বনাম রাষ্ট্র |
এমতাবস্থায়, নিম্ন আদালতের বিজ্ঞ বিচারকগণের, যাঁরা উচ্চতর ডিগ্রী অর্জন বা পেশাগত উচ্চতর কোর্স সম্পন্ন করেছেন বা করবেন, বিচারকার্যক্রমে বিশেষত: রায়, আদেশ, অর্ডারশীটে তাঁদের নামের অংশ হিসেবে ডিগ্রী উল্লেখ বাঞ্ছনীয়/কাম্য নয়। এটা প্রত্যশা করা ন্যায্য হবে যে, সংশ্লিষ্ট বিচারকগণ স্বীয় বুদ্ধিমত্তা ও প্রজ্ঞা দিয়ে বিষয়টি বিবেচনায় নিয়ে নামের অংশ হিসেবে উচ্চতর ডিগ্রীর ব্যবহার থেকে নিজেদের বিরত রাখবেন। |
|
202 |
Criminal Misc 25615/2019 |
Md. Nazmul Huda Vs. The State and another |
Moreso, the word `অভিযোগটি অনুসন্ধানের জন্য` as contemplated in section 27(1ka) is very significant. It means that an inquiry should be done on the allegations brought against an accused. It does not mean that inquiry should be done to ascertain whether the complainant went to the police station and he/she was refused by the police.
Further, when upon an inquiry by a competent person the allegations made against an accused is prima facie found to be true then the concerned accused should not be given a go by merely on any hiper technical issue. |
|
203 |
Writ Petition 13989/2016 |
হিউম্যান রাইটস এন্ড পিস ফর বাংলাদেশ বনাম বাংলাদেশ সরকার ও অন্যান্য |
|
|
204 |
Criminal Misc 10085/2016
(Criminal Misc 10085/2016) |
মোঃ সফিকুল ইসলাম বনাম রাষ্ট্র ও অন্য |
যৌতুকের দাবীসহ যেকোন অজুহাতে স্বামী কর্তৃক স্ত্রীর উপর শারীরিক নির্যাতন নিঃসন্দেহে নিন্দনীয় এবং গর্হিত অপরাধ। এতদ্ সত্ত্বেও উক্ত অপরাধ সংগঠনের পর যদি স্বামী ও স্ত্রী নিজেদের মধ্যে ভুলবোঝাবুঝির অবসান ঘটিয়ে দাম্পত্য জীবন অব্যাহত রাখার সংকল্প ব্যক্ত করেন বা রাখেন সেক্ষেত্রে আইনের বিধান যতো কঠিনই হোক না কেন একটি সংসার রক্ষা করার চাইতে সেটি বড় হতে পারে না। একটি সংসার ভেঙ্গে গেলে তার পারিবারিক ও সামাজিক নেতিবাচক দিক সুদূর প্রসারী। এতে শুধু স্বামী-স্ত্রীর সামাজিক, পারিবারিক ও অর্থনৈতিক বিপর্যয়ই ঘটেনা, তাঁদের সন্তান এমনকি নিকট আত্মীয় স্বজনের উপরেও এর গভীর নেতিবাচক প্রভাব পড়ে, যা পূরণ করা খুব কঠিন কাজ হয়ে পড়ে। এই বাস্তবতায় আমাদের উচিৎ হবে ন্যা য়বিচার নিশ্চিত (to secure ends of justice) করার স্বার্থে অত্র মামলায় বর্তমান বাস্তব অবস্থা বিবেচনায় নিয়ে একটি সংসার ও দরখাস্তকারী-অভিযোগকারীনির শিশু সন্তানের সুন্দর ভবিষ্যৎ নিশ্চিত করার লক্ষ্যে ফৌজদারী কার্যবিধির ৫৬১-ক ধারার প্রদত্ত ক্ষমতাবলে পক্ষদ্বয়ের আপোষের অভিপ্রায়কে গুরুত্ব দিয়ে দন্ডিত দরখাস্তকারীর দন্ড বাতিল ও সাজা মওকুফ করা। |
|
205 |
Criminal Revision 733/2019 |
Moudud Ahmed, son of late Maulana Momtazuddin Ahmad Vs. The State and another |
Direction given from the Supreme Court upon the subordinate judiciary is not directory rather it is mandatory. |
|
206 |
Criminal Revision (Suo-Muto) 246/2018 |
The State Vs. M. Wahidul Haque and others |
|
|
207 |
Criminal Misc (Suo-Muto) Rule 11921/2003
(Criminal Misc (Suo-Muto) Rule 11921/2003) |
The State Vs. Md. Firoz Alam and others |
Directives for the lower judiciary how to provide the protocol service to the Supreme Court Judges` |
|
208 |
Criminal Appeal(H) 1676/2018
(with Crl Appeal 2215 of 2018 with Crl Appeal 2292 of 2018 with Crl Revision 741 of 2018) |
Begum Khaleda Zia Vs. The State and another |
Admittedly the Trust was formed of two sons and one near relative of Begum Zia presumably, they did it with culpable suzerainty and on explicit endorsement of Begum Zia. The facts unveiled suggest the conclusion that Begum Zia knowingly and in violation of obligation, allowed the fund to be dealt with dishonestly by the Trust leading to its misappropriation.
It is not believable that without the knowledge and endorsement of Begum Zia the fund was so transferred in the accounts of other convict persons. For Begum Zia in no way can be exonerated of liability and obligation of such dishonest intention. Besides, Begum Zia was the key person on deliberate failure and endorsement of whom the fund was eventually misappropriated.
Today, corruption which includes financial crime also in our country not only poses a grave danger to the concept of good governance, it also threatens the very foundation of the democracy, social justice and the Rule of Law. It is beyond controversy that where corruption begins all rights end. Corruption devalues human rights, chokes development and undermines justice, liberty, equality, fraternity which are the core values of our constitution. Thus, the duty of the court is to work in such a manner to strengthen the fight against corruption. Therefore, there is no scope to take a lenient view in awarding punishment to an accused against whom charge has been proved considering his/her social and/or political position. |
|
209 |
Death Reference 3/2017 |
The State Vs. Lt. Col. (Rtd.)Tarek Sayed and ors |
|
|
210 |
Death Reference 4/2017 |
The State Vs. Lt. Col. (Rtd.) Tarek Sayed and ors |
|
|
211 |
Criminal Appeal(H) 4813/2007 |
Nazmul Huda and another Vs. The State and another |
|
|
212 |
Criminal Revision 2367/2018 |
Begum Khaleda Zia, Former Prime Minister, wife of Shaheed President Ziaur Rahman Vs. Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), Dhaka and another |
It is the discretion of the trial Judge to exercise his power under section 540A of the Code of Criminal Procedure either on his own volition or any application filed by either of the party, the prosecution or defence. |
|
213 |
Writ Petition 3932/2018
(/) |
A.K.M. Zakaria Hossain Choudhury Vs Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Dhaka and others |
|
|
214 |
Death Reference 11/2011 |
The State -Vs- Md. Mazed and others |
|
|
215 |
Death Reference 55/2010
(Death Reference 55/2010) |
The State-Bipul Chandra Ray |
|
|
216 |
Death Reference 22/2012
(with Crl Apl.2895 of 2012 with Crl Apl 2634 of 2012 with Jail Apl105 of 2012) |
The State Vs. Md. Abdul Mazid and another |
|
|
217 |
Criminal Misc 3858/2017 |
Fazlus Sobhan Vs. The State and another |
Thus, we are constrained to hold that the Anti-Corruption Commission being a statutory body has utterly failed to comply with and to pay due regard to the observations made by the Highest Court of the country which tantamount to demeaning and flouting the orders of the Court. |
|
218 |
Criminal Misc 26989/2018 |
Begum Khaleda Zia Vs. The State |
In the prevailing facts and circumstance of the present case it is patent that in the name of receiving the execution report of warrant of arrest the Magistrate concerned has unnecessarily prolonged the disposal of the prayer for bail of the accused which tantamount to abuse of the process of the court. |
|
219 |
Review Petition 16/2014 |
Project Head (General Manager) UMC Jute Mills Limited, Narsingdi Vs. Paritosh Saha |
|
|
220 |
Writ Petition 5675/2017
(Writ Petition) |
|
|
|
221 |
Writ Petition 8716/2017 |
M/S Liberty Fashion Wears Limited Vs. Bangladesh Accord Foundation |
|
|
222 |
Suo-Muto Rule 16/2017 |
The State Vs. Registrar General, Supreme Court of Bangladesh and others |
On scrutiny of the impugned letter we have no hesitation to hold that the Supreme Court administration in issuing the impugned letter having considered some extraneous and irrelevant facts has abused its discretionary power vested in it.
The opinion in guise of direction expressed in the impugned letter was not the upshot of any judicial determination. Such a mere administrative letter although issued as per the verbal instruction of the Hon’ble Chief Justice, patently impinges upon the rights and lawful authority of the Commission to go on with the inquiry into an allegation of corruption. |
|
223 |
Writ Petition 5556/2014 |
Shakwat Hossain Bhuiyan |
|
|
224 |
Writ Petition 4161/2017 |
Rezaul Haque Chowdhury VS Government of Bangladesh and others |
|
|
225 |
First Appeal 1/2017 |
Bangladesh Telecommunication Company Limited (BTCL) Vs. Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission and others |
|
|
226 |
Writ Petition 11585/2017 |
Ms. Musarat Islam and others Vs. Government of the People’s Republic of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary Ministry of Land and others |
|
|
227 |
Writ Petition 8932/2011
(Writ Petition 8932/2011) |
Md. Abdul Hye, son of late Abdur Rashid 2/404, Eastern Rokeya Tower 98 Boro Moghbazar, Dhaka Vs Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Land, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka and others |
Enemy properties. |
|
228 |
Civil Revision 3537/2016 |
বাংলাদেশ অভ্যন্তরীণ নৌ-পরিবহন কর্তৃপক্ষ (বি,আই,ডব্লিউ,টি,এ) বনাম মোতাহার হোসেন বিশ্বাস গং |
|
|
229 |
Criminal Misc 20550/2014
(Criminal Misc 20550/2014) |
Md. Aynul Haque alias Abdul Mannan Vs The state and another |
|
|
230 |
Contempt Petition(H) 202/2017
(/) |
Dr. Kamila Afroj Quadir Vs Mr. Md. Anowar Hossain, Secretary (Current Charge), Ministry of Science and Technology, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka and others |
|
|
231 |
Writ Petition 5579/2014
(/) |
Mr. M. Qumrul Haque Siddique, Advocate, SupremeCourt of Bangladesh Vs The Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Government of thePeople’s Republic of Bangladesh, BangladeshSecretariat, Ramna, Dhaka-1000 and others |
|
|
232 |
Transferred Misc Case 1/2016
(Transferred Misc Case 1/2016) |
Catherine Masud VS Md. Kashed Miah |
|
|
233 |
Writ Petition 1932/2017
(with W. P. No. 3636 of 2017) |
Asian Traffic Technologies Ltd. Vs The Government of Bangladesh represented by theSecretary, Road, Transport and Highways Division,Ministry of Road, Transport and Bridges, BangladeshSecretariat, Dhaka-1000 and others |
|
|
234 |
Writ Petition 11395/2012
(Writ Petition 11395/2012) |
Shantinagar Bohumukhi Samabay samity VS Bangladesh, represented by the Secretary Ministry of Land, Bangladesh Secretariat Building, Ramna, Dhaka. |
|
|
235 |
Writ Petition 12839/2012
(Writ Petition 12839/2012) |
Rezia Bibi alias Most. Rezia Khatun Bibi VS Artha Rin Adalat, Bogra |
|
|
236 |
Death Reference 99/2015
(Criminal Appeal No. 10281 of 2015 with Jail Appeal No. 2016 of 2015) |
The State-Vs-Oyshee Rahman |
1. Condemned prisoner committed double murder without
any apparent motive and was suffering from mental
derailment or some sort of mental disorder and also
suffering from ovarian cyst and bronchial asthma;
2. Her paternal grandmother and maternal uncle had a
history of psychiatric disorders according to exibit-15;
3. She was around 19[nineteen] year old at the relevant
time and the occurrence took place just immediately
after her attaining the age of majority;
4. She has no such significant history of prior criminal
activity [criminal cases] and
5. She had willingly surrendered to the police station soon
after two days of the occurrence. |
|
237 |
First Misc Appeal 19/2011
(with Civil Rule 530 (F.M.)/2010) |
শেখ আবু সেলিম বনাম বাংলাদেশ হাউজ বিল্ডিং ফাইন্যান্স কর্পোরেশন গং |
|
|
238 |
Writ Petition 5091/2014 |
Md. Ataul Goni Sheikh and others Vs.The People’s Republic of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Railway, Bangladesh Secretariat, Ramna, Dhaka and others |
|
|
239 |
Criminal Revision 1050/2017 |
Abdul Kader Gazi Vs. The State and another |
The learned Judge of the Shishu Adalat, Chandpur committed serious error of law and exceeded its jurisdiction while dealing with the application for bail of an adult accused and that too without having the case record for trial in due course.
Moreover, section 18 of the Shishu Ain, 2013 will come into play after the case record is transmitted to the Shishu Adalat for trial, not before that. |
|
240 |
Criminal Appeal(H) 6094/2016
(Criminal Appeal(H) 6094/2016) |
Lokman Vs Ayub Ali and the State |
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Section 118(a) and 138:
Cheque is a negotiable instrument (section 13). In the instant case, the prosecution story as narrated in the petition of complaint and the deposition of the complainant as PW1 sharply contradicts each other as to when the complainant paid the money to the accused against which the cheque was issued to repay the same. The petition of complaint is silent about the date of monetary transaction, but states that the cheque was issued by the accused subsequently. In deposition, the complainant stated that the payment of money and issuance of the cheque took place on the same date which creates a doubt as to passing off consideration to the complainant against which the cheque was issued. Therefore, the presumption under section 118(a) of the Act, 1881 as to consideration has been successfully rebutted by the defence. ...(Para 14)
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Section 9:
In my view, the trial Court has correctly found that the complainant is not the holder of the cheque in due course. ...(Para 17) |
|
241 |
Death Reference 93/2015
((Criminal Appeal Nos. 9126, 9235,9346,10748 and 10049 of 2015) |
The State-Vs- Qamrul Islam and others |
|
|
242 |
Writ Petition 8437/2011
(with Writ Petition No. 10482/2011 with Writ Petition No. 4879 of 2012) |
Kamruzzaman Khan Vs.Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Law,Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Bangladesh Secretariat,Ramna, Dhaka and others |
|
|
243 |
Death Reference 1/2016
(With Crl Appl 651/2016 , 1011/2016, 1107/2016, 7872/2016) |
The State Vs. Md. Foysal Bin Nayem @ Dip and Redoyanul Azad @ Rana |
|
|
244 |
Writ Petition 11078/2014 |
Rama Prasanna Bhattacharjee vs. Government of Bangladesh and others |
DO letter is not an official communication made by any machinery of the Republic. |
|
245 |
Criminal Misc 4397/2008
(Criminal Misc 4397/2008) |
Dr. Zubaida Rahman vs. The State and another |
|
|
246 |
Criminal Revision 2569/2016 |
Moudud Ahmed vs. The State and another |
|
|
247 |
Writ Petition 4403/2010 |
Raghib Rauf Chowdhury vs. Government of Bangladesh and others |
Regarding the appointment of Judges of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh |
|
248 |
Writ Petition 6300/2016
(with W. P. 1699 of 2015 with W. P. 61 of 2016 with W.P. 1607 of 2016) |
Association of Ship Recycling in Bangladesh and another Vs. The Government of Bangladesh represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Commerce, Bangladesh Secretariat, Dhaka and others |
|
|
249 |
Criminal Appeal(H) 4417/2016 |
Md. Milad Hossain @ Milad Uddin Vs. The State |
Therefore, the Registrar General of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh is directed to constitute a Monitoring Cell headed by him or the Registrar of the High Court Division along with the Secretary or his representative not below the rank of Additional Secretary of the Ministry of Home Affairs and Law and Justice Division, Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs. The Monitoring Cell shall monitor this aspect and shall submit report from time to time to the concerned authorities of the responsible persons for taking appropriate action in accordance with section 31Ka (3) of the Act, 2000 with a copy thereof to the Monitoring Committee for the Subordinate Judiciary of the Supreme Court. |
|
250 |
Death Reference 31/2010
(Death Reference 31/2010 (Criminal Appeal No. 3404 of 2010 and Jail Appeal No. 158 of 2010)) |
The State -Vs- Abul Kashem Kha |
|
