Case Number Parties Short Description 1 Civil Revision 2278/2024 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 14-MAY-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Chowdhury Md. Abul Hasan Ibn Kashem alias Abu Md. Bin Kashem Chowdhury -Vs- Chowdhury Md. Abu Nasar Ibn Kashem and others A party may be considered a necessary party after fulfilling two conditions. First, there must be a right to some relief against him regarding the matter involved in the suit. 2 Civil Revision 2824/2024 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-MAY-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Abdul Hamid being dead, his heirs Md. Monju Miah and others -Vs- Md. Siddique Miah being dead, his heirs Kolpona Khatun and others The homestead of an owner in a rural area is exempted from all legal processes, rather than in order to get such protection, the homestead must be in a rural area as per the proviso so enumerated in section 6 of the land reform Ordinance 1984. Any person, who is in possession of a homestead, will be an `owner` and enjoy the protection under the Ordinance. 3 Civil Revision 5925/2022 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-APR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Yasmin and others. -Vs- Kolim Ullah and others The record of rights is not a document of title. It does not create or extinguish title to land. 4 Civil Revision 2528/2021 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 27-APR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Lutfun Nesa -Vs- Feli Nessa and others. A person, if not authorise by the plaintiff or defendant, except husband and wife, could not depose on his behalf in the Court, if depose, he would be treated as incompetent witness. ‘‘In a suit for partition the co-sharers are necessary parties in the sense that in the absence of any such co-sharer the Judgment which will be given in such a suit may be rendered infructuous at the option of the excluded party.’’ 5 Civil Revision 1433/2022 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 23-APR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Shaharavanu being dead, her legal heirs: Md. Habib Mir @ Mir Habibur Rahman and others. -Vs- Sheikh Humayun Kabir and others. An ex parte decree can also be set aside by a regular suit if it is provided that there was suppression of summons and the defendant was prevented from defending the suit by reason of fraud. 6 Civil Revision 5838/2002 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 17-APR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Ashir Uddin Akand -Vs- The Government of Bangladesh, represented by the deputy commissioner, Bogura, and others That fraud vitiates all judicial proceeding. “After passing the final order on 7.4.213 rejecting the substantive application under sections 107 and 233 of the Act, 1994 and the order having been sealed and signed, the Company judge became functus officio and had no power to assume jurisdiction by way of modification of the said order; he could do so only on a proper application for review of the order.” 7 Civil Revision 4896/2011 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 17-APR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Ruhul Amin -Vs- Md. Osman Ali 8 Civil Revision 1132/2023 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 15-APR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Shaishir Ahmed Shahnawaz -Vs- Tureen Afroz It is the settled proposition of law that in the case of the temporary injunction, the court is to see whether a fair and arguable case exists in favor of issuing an injunction, and the court needs not to enter into the merit of the case. 9 Civil Rule 415/2021 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 20-MAR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Government of Bangladesh, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Narail -Vs- Muklesur Rahman Molla and Samirunnesa being died their legal heirs: Shahidul Islam Molla and others 10 Civil Revision 1282/2008 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 11-MAR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Abdul Mannan and others -Vs- A.H.M. Saifullah and others “If the question is whether the deed is genuine or not, the simple answer is, it being a registered document, is showered with a strong presumption as to genuineness. Sections 59, 79, and 144 of the Evidence Act also lend support to section 60 of the Registration Act on this score. No doubt, this presumption is rebuttable, It is the settled proposition of law that in a suit for cancellation of a deed/ setting aside a decree passed by a competent court, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to prove by cogent evidence that the decree/deed was obtained by fraud practicing. it is well settled that in the determination of the question of facts, parties should not be allowed to lead evidence without proper pleadings. 11 Civil Revision 1528/2021 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 05-MAR-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Abdul Motaleb Hawlader -Vs- Md. Shahadath Hossain being dead, his legal heirs: Khairun Nessa and others. Muslim law requires no particular formalities for the creation of a Wasiyatnama. It may be made in writing, or oral, or even by gestures. In the case of a written Wasiyatnama, there should be two witnesses to the declaration of Wasiyatnama. However, the intention of the Testator must be unequivocal and unambiguous that the Wasiyatnama is to be executed after his death. Any expression that signifies the Testator`s intention is sufficient to constitute a bequest. In the case of an oral Wasiyatnama, no specific number or class of witnesses is necessary for its validity. However, the following conditions need to be satisfied:- I. Legator`s intention to make a Wasiyatnama must be proved beyond doubt. III. Terms of the Wasiyatnama must be proved III. Wasiyatnama must be proved with the greatest possible exactness. When the Testator fails to mention the quantity or amount of bequeathed property, regard may be given to the number or quantity owned by the Testator at the time of death. Wasiyatnama shall be executed after paying debts and funeral expenses. To confirm a Wasiyatnama executed, there is no essence required by law for filing a probate case by a Muslim. 12 Civil Revision 631/2021 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 27-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Ruhul Amin Sikder -Vs- Mohammad Aiyub Khan and others. If there any reasonable apprehensions born in the mind of a person for certain circumstances applying for transfer the suit that he would not receive fair dealings at his trial, or, in other words, that he may not have a fair and impartial trial and may not get justice in the Court, where the suit is pending, the suit should be transferred. 13 Civil Revision 2941/2023 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 26-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Nasir Uddin @ Md. Nasir Uddin -Vs-Amin Ullah and others The order of dismissal of the suit was not under any of the rules of Order 9 of the Code. All the rules of Order 9 CPC refer to the date fixed for hearing the suit and as such the court, in my opinion, should not have rejected the application on the ground of limitation as application under Order 9 rule 4 CPC is not attracted to the facts of the present case. In the light of the decision in Brojendra Lal Roy I am of the opinion that the learned Munsif ought to have treated the application as being one made under section 151 CPC to which no period of limitation applies. This is certainly an important question of law. In that view of the matter, the contention of the learned Advocate that the suit should have been restored and heard seems to be of substance. 14 Civil Revision 2503/2023 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 24-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Abdul Mannan alias Md. Mannan Fakir -Vs- Md. Kader and others. Where the subject-matter of the suit is immovable property, the plaint shall contain a description of the property sufficient to identify it, and, in case such property can be identified by boundaries or numbers in a record of settlement or survey, the plaint shall specify such boundaries or numbers. The principle of law is firmly established that a person who bases his title on adverse possession must show by clear and unequivocal evidence that his possession was hostile to the real owner and amounted to a denial of his title to the property claimed. 15 Civil Revision 1409/2021 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Sheikh Ekram Hossain (Jahid) and another -Vs- Most. Saleha Khatun, being dead, her heirs: Sheikh Shamsul Alam and others The appellate court, as the final court of the finding of facts, affirms the trial court`s Judgment on a proper assessment of evidence on record, there is no misreading of material evidence, and the findings do not suffer from any error of law. 16 Civil Revision 1509/2016 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Omar Ali -Vs- Sree Kartik Chgandra Sarker and another An ex-parte judgment and decree can be set aside on two grounds: (I) that the summons was not duly served or (II) that any sufficient cause prevented him from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing. 17 Civil Revision 3567/2023 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Dr. Rajib Kumar Goswami and another -Vs- Md. Al Mamun Kha The foundation for the exercise of the power under this rule is the fulfilment of the two requirements of rule 21 of Order 11 of the Code. The first is the failure of the interrogated party to comply with any order to answer the interrogatory, and the second is the interrogatoring party applying to the court to impose the penalty. 18 First Misc Appeal 258/2008 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 11-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Badiul Alam Dobash being dead, his heir: 1(a)-Wahedul Alam Dobash -Vs- Jarina Khatun being dead, her heirs: 1(a) Lutfunnessa and others The provision of section 50 of the Waqfs Ordinance, 1962, in an unambiguous term, vested authority upon the Administrator of Waqfs to decide title and ownership of a property to be waqf property like an ordinary civil court with the help of evidence or other materials on record while releasing the same from the waqf estate but without doing so, the Administrator of Waqfs undersigned by the Deputy Administrator in a very cursory refused to entertain the application of the respondent. 19 Civil Revision 5233/2002 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 09-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Afizuddin being dead, his legal heirs: Akter Hossain and others. -Vs- Md. Abdul Haque and others. Simple suit for declaration that the Judgment and decree dated 06.08.1970 passed in Other Class Suit No. 317 of 1969 is null and void without making a further prayer for declaration of title and confirmation of possession is not maintainable. In a suit for cancellation of a decree passed by a competent court, it is incumbent upon the plaintiff to prove by cogent evidence the decree was obtained by fraud practicing. According to Section 90 of the Evidence Act, it is the duty of the plaintiffs to prove that the defendants have created forged documents and procured the Judgment and decree dated 06.08.1970 in Other Class Suit No.317 of 1969 collusively and fraudulently though the documents were more than 30 years old. 20 Civil Revision 1414/2000 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 05-FEB-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Rajkumar Paul -Vs- Pachibala Paul being dead, his legal heirs: Santosh Kumar Paul and others. Since the suit deed is a registered document, it is a strong presumption that the alleged deed is a genuine instrument. The findings for cancellation of the deed are beyond the pleading and the materials on record, which is not at all sustainable in the eye of the law. So, the appellate court below, without considering the plaint, decreed the suit, which is barred under Order VI Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure. 21 Civil Revision 1401/2017 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 29-JAN-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) A. Razzak Mridha and others -Vs- Md. Shahadath Hossain being dead, his legal heirs: Khairun Nessa and others. Since the suit land is ascertainable, there was no necessity to give any specifications/boundary of the suit land as there was full compliance with the provisions of Order VII Rule 3 of the Code. “Though there is conflict between the C.S. and R.S. Khatian, the R.S. Khatian will prevail over the former.” 22 Civil Revision 1044/2002 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-JAN-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Abdul Hannan being dead his legal heirs: Jashim Uddin and others. -Vs- Safat Ullah @ Sifat Ullah and others. A conditional document for re-payment of money is not a deed of absolute transfer,i.e., sale under Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act. A condition of purchase and condition of purchase having expired, the sale became a past and closed transaction, and the plaintiff was not entitled to get any relief on the ground that the property was a mortgaged property. 23 Civil Revision 3306/2017 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 15-JAN-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Rais Uddin -Vs- Md. Taiz Uddin Ahammed Taz and others An application under Order 9 rule 13 CPC, which gave rise to Miscellaneous Case No. 106 of 1989, was filed on 16.11.89. From this it is apparent that this application for setting aside the ex parte decree was filed after 49 days from the date of passing the impugned decree. Article 164 of the Limitation Act provides that an application for setting aside an ex parte decree shall have to be filed within 30 days from the date of the decree where summons was duly served and within 30 days from the date of knowledge when summons was not duly served. In our case under review there is no denial of the fact of due service of summons. So, evidently this case is governed by Article 164 of the Limitation Act, which provides that the application for setting aside the ex parte decree is required to be filed within 30 days from the date of decree impugned. 24 Civil Revision 2283/2022 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 15-JAN-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) S. M. Prince (Babu) -Vs- Md. Tozammel Haque Sarker and others The plaintiff mentioned the number of the C.S. and S. A. Khatians and also the plot numbers in the suit, and thus, there was full compliance with the provisions of Order VII Rule 3 of the Code. And since no fraction or portion of the lands of the two plots was claimed, there was no necessity of giving any Chauhaddi or boundary of the suit plots. "If the dispute involves complicated questions of title, the plaintiff must establish his title by filing a regular suit for declaration of title. A simple suit for a permanent injunction should not be allowed to be used as a testing device to ascertain the title". 25 Civil Revision 830/2006 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 14-JAN-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Solaiman Hossen -Vs- Md. Anwar Hossen and others The onus of proof entirely lies upon the party, who asserts that the transfer is a sub-kabala in disguise of a deed of exchange under section 101 and 103 of the Evidence Act [ I of 1872] The preemptor`s incumbent duty is to prove by adequate tangible, credible evidence that the deed in question is out and out a sale deed, in disguise of a deed of exchange. 26 Civil Revision 2349/2014 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 12-JAN-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Abdul Khalek, being dead, his heirs: Md. Oyaz Kuruny and others -Vs- Md. Monayem Hossain and others Any land recorded in Khatian as Bagan Bari, Bithi, Bari but situated outside the municipal area should fall within the definition of agricultural land. Mention of a wrong provision or omission to mention the provision containing the source of power will not invalidate an order where such power exists. 27 Civil Revision 3821/2016 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 05-JAN-25 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Abdul Gofur Mia being died his heirs- Md. Habibur Rahman Riad and others -Vs- Shefali Begum and others. The applicant-opposite parties have accrued a right to be impleaded as co-plaintiffs in the suit either under the provisions Order 22 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure or under the provisions Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure as they are necessary parties in the suit. 28 Civil Revision 163/1997 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 23-DEC-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Mr. Nazmul Afaq - Vs- Taher Uddin alias Abu Mia and others “Formal defect” has not been defined anywhere in the Code. However, some suitable authorities believe the expression “formal defect” should receive wide and liberal meaning. Even when a plaintiff cannot withdraw his suit with liberty to sue afresh on the grounds of any “formal defect,” the Court may still allow him to do so on any other ground sufficient for the satisfaction of the Court. 29 Civil Revision 1743/2024 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 23-DEC-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Haji Mohammad Ali and others -Vs- Kamrun Nahar @ Kamrunnessa and others With regard to rejection of plaint under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the High Court Division rightly found that in deciding the question as to whether a plaint is liable to be rejected, the court is always required to peruse the plaint only and court is not permitted to travel beyond the plaint to dig out grounds to reject the plaint which is a settled principle of law.’’ It is the cardinal settled proposition of the law that a plaint of a suit cannot be rejected before filing the written statement. 30 First Misc Appeal 14/2001 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 23-DEC-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Abdul Quddus Sarker and others -Vs- Most. Rasna Begum and others In order to come under the purview of Order 41 Rule 19 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the plaintiffs-appellants were to satisfy the court that there was sufficient cause for non-appearance when the appeal was called on for hearing. 31 Civil Revision 5397/2023 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 10-DEC-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Mojibur Rahman and others -Vs- Abul Hossain Majhi and others All amendments ought to be allowed, at any of the proceedings, which satisfy the two conditions (a) of not working injustice to the other side, and (b) of being necessary for the purpose of determining the real question in controversy between the parties. 32 Civil Revision 2563/2019 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-DEC-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Bimal Sardar @ Munda and others -Vs- Alhaj Sheikh Md. Wazed Ali and others If the dispute involves complicated questions of title, a simple suit for a perpetual injunction must not be maintainable. 33 Civil Revision 3831/2006 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 01-DEC-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Abdus Sobhan Gharami -Vs- Government of the Peoples Republic of Bangladesh, represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Patuakhali and others. If there was sufficient cause for non-appearance of the plaintiff when the suit was called on for hearing, the court shall make an order setting aside the dismissal with costs. 34 Civil Revision 143/2010 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 21-NOV-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Executive Engineer, Roads and High Ways, Brahmanbaria -Vs- Abdul Motalib and others the appellate court, though it discussed the issue of service of summons of the title Suit No.107 of 1998 upon the defendant, did not consider the aspect of knowledge of the defendant of the title Suit No.107 of 1998 as found by the trial Court. Therefore, it appears that the appellate court committed an error in law, which resulted in an error in the decision, occasioning a failure of justice in holding that the summons was duly served upon the defendant. Therefore, the judgment and decree of Title Suit No. 107 of 1998 are not binding upon the plaintiff-petitioner. Since the government has acquired the suit land, the suit lands are protected from the date of publication of the Gazette Notification dated 12.10.1954; the same could not be transferred legally by any person to any other persons. 35 Civil Revision 3676/2012 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 19-NOV-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Jatindra Nath Howlader -Vs- Bulu Mitra @ Mistri and others Since the case land is homestead the instant case is not at all maintainable in the present form as per the provision so enumerated in section 96( 16 ) of the State Acquisition and Tenancy Act. 36 Civil Revision 1953/2022 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 11-NOV-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Motahar Hosen -Vs- Abdul Wadud and another The petitioner have to satisfy the court that the summons was not duly served, or that he was prevented by any sufficient cause from appearing when the suit was called on for hearing, for setting aside the ex-parte decree under Order 9 Rule 13. 37 Civil Revision 1045/2009 (Civil Revision No. 1045 of 2009) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 03-NOV-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Government of Bangladesh represented by the Deputy Commissioner, Gopalgonj -Vs- Nuruzzaman Mia and others After the retrospective amendment made by Ordinance No. XII of 1960 in section 20 of the Act by the incorporation therein of sub-section (2a), which had the effect of excluding hats and bazars from the category of returnable lands from the very beginning, the hats and bazars in the khas possession of the rent-receiver became vested in the government from the date of the notification in 1956 under sub-section 2 of section 3 of the Act. 38 Civil Revision 474/2022 (Civil Revision No. 474 of 2022) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 17-OCT-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Anwar Hossain Vs Mst. Shahnaj Pervin and another The defendant petitioner is bound to maintain his unmarried daughter( plaintiff No.2) till the date of her marital status. The law does not say that the daughter will lose her right to maintenance from her father after attending the age of eighteen (18). 39 Criminal Misc 19526/2014 (Criminal Misc Case No. 19526 of 2014) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 26-SEP-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Mosaraf Hossain Vs The state and another When a Naraji Petition is filed by the aggrieved prson the tribunal after examination ought to have sent the matter for further inquiry as per section 27(1ka) and (ka) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain,2000 because by now it is settled that Naraji Petition is a fresh complaint. The Tribunal did not take cognizance offence on the basis of police report, nor it directed for further investigation on the basis of Naraji Petition under section 202 of the code of criminal procedure as such the taking cognizance of offence on the basis of naraji petition without examining the complainant under section 200 is without jurisdiction, unlawful and abuse of the processes of the court. “It is evident from the materials on record that the incident of assault on the complainant is alleged to have occurred on 06.02.2009, whereas the accused husband claims to have divorced the complainant on 19.01.2009. The High Court Division observed that since the divorce took place earlier, the victim was not supposed to be present in the house of her husband after 19.01.2009”. 40 Criminal Misc 12733/2021 (Criminal Misc Case No. 12733/2021) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 02-JUL-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Sultan Khan Vs The State and another The medical examination of the victim of the commission of the offense under the Nari-O- Shishu Nirjatan Daman Ain, 2000 shall be done in a government hospital or in any private hospital recognized by the government for that purpose regarding injuries caused by the accused. 41 Criminal Misc 52256/2018 (Criminal Misc. Case No. 52256 of 2018) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 02-JUL-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Sultan Khan Vs The State and another Nevertheless, Section 463 of the penal code defines forgery including forgery of documents that purport to give authority to any person to receive or deliver any payment of money or purports to be a receipt acknowledging payment of money. Therefore, the alleged forged ‘Solenama’ comes within the ambit of section 463 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Since no complaint in writing has been made by a competent Court as per the provision so enumerated in Clause c of Section 195(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 we have no option but to interfere with the instant proceedings invoking our inherent jurisdiction under section 561A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 42 Jail Appeal(H) (TN) 1339/2010 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-APR-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Momtaj Ala Zakir Ahmed vs The State and A.C.C. The offenses punishable under Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 201 of the penal code no doubt are distinct but as the distinct offenses were committed in the course of the same transaction with the same aim in view by the accused petitioner the charge has rightly been framed by the learned Special Judge. 43 Criminal Misc 37122/2022 (Md. Mosharaf Hossain vs Mr. Md. Hafizur Rahman) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-APR-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) The law does not allow him to file the instant case as a "complainant‘‘ because he is not the holder of the cheque for consideration rather he is an outsider. Therefore, the statutory requirements as provided in sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 have not been complied with in respect of this case while filing the same. 44 Criminal Misc 6004/2023 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 28-APR-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Mofizur Rahman Taku vs The State and another Whether a person was in charge and was responsible for the conduct of the business of the company at the relevant point of time is a question of fact and this fact cannot be entertained under section 561A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The Cheque is an instrument issued by a person asking any financial institution to pay a fixed sum of money. It has not been given any extra qualification by giving any nomenclature. Crossed cheques, MICR, or NOn MICR cheques all are cheques under Section 6 of the instrument1881 and mentioned in sections 13, 138, and all other relevant sections of the said Act. 45 Criminal Misc 15937/2017 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Amir Jahan Dilshad Begum and another vs The State and another The accused petitioners had any dishonest intention to deceive the money. Moreover, from a plain reading of the petition of complaint and inquiry report it manifests that the accused persons allegedly contracted to rent a shop to the complainant for Tk 1,10,000/- as a security deposit, and whilst the complainant asked the accused persons to return the said security deposit the accused persons refused to pay the money does not constitute any criminal offense. Therefore, we hold that the alleged transaction between the complaint and the accused persons is clearly and admittedly a business transaction and that the allegation brought against the accused petitioners is a civil liability and is a case of non-performance of contract or breach of contract as the ingredients of cheating are vacuous. 46 Criminal Misc 4233/2019 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Moin Ullah Chowdhury Tutul vs The State and another The learned Judge, Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Tribunal, Chattagram by an order dated 21.11.2017 framed the charge against the accused Senoara Begum while discharging the complainant opposite party of the instant case and others from the case. There would, therefore be a natural presumption that the tribunal after discussing shreds of evidence could not conclude that the case filed against the complainant of the instant case was false. 47 Criminal Misc 55442/2022 অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 04-APR-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Monfor Ali and others vs The State When the police after the investigation have submitted a final report or a charge sheet once there is no scope in the scheme of the code of criminal procedure to direct the investigating officer to submit a supplementary charge sheet. 48 Criminal Misc 64210/2019 (Criminal Misc 64210/2019) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 07-MAR-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Nayaz Ahmed vs The State and another We have no hesitation to hold that since a special provision for appeal has been made against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, no application against such judgment and order of conviction and sentence under section 561A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is maintainable at all except that the convicted person makes out a case of coram non-judice or facts alleged do not constitute any offence or conviction based on no legal evidence or for securing the ends of justice. 49 Criminal Revision 2928/2018 (Criminal Revision 2928/2018) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 13-FEB-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Rafiqul Islam Vs. The State and another The instant criminal proceeding is not dependent on the decisions of that Artharin Suit and it can be heard and disposed of independently. The proceeding under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act is under a special law that appears to be independent in nature with a very limited to the issue involved in the Artharin Suit or any other suit/case. According to the policy of the Law, criminal cases should be resolved as quickly as possible. Even if there is a civil case related to the same matter that is pending, it is not a valid reason to delay the criminal proceedings that are initiated later. 50 Criminal Misc 13238/2017 (Criminal Misc 13238/2017) অনুবাদ (Google) Uploaded on : 08-FEB-24 From : Bijoy 71 Building Court No. 2 (3rd Floor) Md. Mahmudur Rahman Mahmud vs The State The instant case was lodged on 01.10.2014 though the 10th National Parliamentary Election was held on 5th January 2014 and the name of the elected candidates was published in the Bangladesh Gazette on 08.01.2014. Therefore it is crystal clear that the instant case was lodged violating the provision so enumerated in Article 90 of the Representation of Peoples Order,1972.