Case Number Parties Short Description
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.
Shakwat Hossain Bhuiyan
Md. Abdul Mazed Vatt @ Md. Yousuf Vs The State
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 Section 540: Section 540 aims to arm a Court with vast discretion to find out the truth in a given case. The entire purpose of this enabling provision is to arrive at the truth or otherwise of the fact under investigation. Thus the section confers a wide discretion to the Court to act as the exigencies of justice require. But the discretion cannot be allowed to be used to fill up the gaps in the evidence of a party who seeks recourse to the use of this provision. Power under the section can be exercised by the Court for judicial consideration only and not to advance the case of prosecution or that of the defence. The power can be exercised to know about something which is not present on the record already due to the failure of either party or due to the reasons beyond the control of any of the parties, or on account of something which has come to light during the trial. The party invoking the jurisdiction of the Court for exercising power in its favour shall satisfy the Court about the existence of lacuna or of the circumstances, which palpably justify such action. Mere quoting the words of section 540 in the application is not enough for exercising such powers. … (Para 17)
Advocate Asaduzzaman Siddiqui and others Vs. Bangladesh represented by the Cabinet Secretary, Cabinet Division, Bangladesh Secretariat