A Motaleb Howlader Vs. The State represented by the Deputy Commissioner Judgment Patuakhali

Appellate Division Cases

(Criminal)

PARTIES

A Motaleb Howlader ………………………………………..Petitioner

-vs-

The State represented by the Deputy Commissioner Judgment Patuakhali . .               …                                                            ……………………..Respondents

JUSTICE

Syed J. R. Mudassir Husain C J

Md. Fazlul Karim J

Amirul Kabir Chowdhury, J

Date of Judgment

17th. March 2004

Appeared before the High Court Division for anticipatory bail said Court directed him to surrender before the Sessions Judge, Patuakhali with in 3 weeks in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1173 of 2002 and therefore, the petitioner surrendered before the Sessions Judge and prayed for bail but the prayer was rejected (2)

Petitioner suppressing the fact moved for bail and thus obtained ad-interim bail from the High Court Division. In consideration of the facts and circumstances the High Court Division appears to have passed the impugned judgment and order discharging the Rule (5)

ADVOCATES

Zahirul Hague, Advocate, instructed by Syed Mahbubar Rahman, Advocate-on-Record For the Petitioner Abdur Razaque Khan, Additional Attorney General, instructed by Ataur Rahman Khan, Advocate-on-Record Respondent

JUDGMENT

1. Amirul Kabir Chowdhury J: – The petitioner A. Motaleb Howlader seeks leave to appeal against the judgment and order dated 27.01.2004 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court Division in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 6213 of 2002 discharging

the Rule by canceling the ad-interim bail.”

2. The facts leading rise to the leave petition, in short, are that one Md. Mojibur Rahman lodged First Information Report against the petitioner and others alleging, inter alia, that they had enmity with the petitioner and others regarding landed property. On 08.12.2001 the petitioner and others were regarding landed property. On 08.12.2001 the petitioner and others formed themselves into unlawful assembly being armed with ramdao, bagi dao. pipegun etc. and attacked the informant party and on getting the information A. Jalil Munshi, cousin of the informant, while was coming towards their house, the accused petitioner along with others obstructed him on his way, created terror by firing their pipegun and kata rifle and the present petitioner gave orders pursuant to which other accused Nos. 4 to 9 mentioned in the first Information Report attacked the aforesaid A. Jalil Munshi with bagi dao etc. causing bleeding injuries on his person and took him to the house of the accused No.4 and some other accused also assaulted the similarly Fariduddin Munshi. A Jabbar Munshi, Eshak Gazi were also assaulted by the accused persons and the police getting information came to the place of occurrence and recovered aforesaid A. Jalil Munshi and injured Fariduddin Munshi with severe injuries and sent them for treatment to Bauphal Hospital were victim A. Jalil was declared to be dead by the Doctor on duty at the Hospital and other injured persons were sent to Barisal Sher-E-Bangla Medical College Hospital for treatment considering the seriousness of their injuries and that the police arrested the accused Nos. 3. 5, 8. 26. 27 and 28 on the spot from the place of occurrence with unauthorized arms in their possession and another case under Arms Act was started and that the present case being investigated the police submitted charge sheet against the accused petitioner and others and that the petitioner being a sitting chairman of the local union perished appeared before the High Court Division for anticipatory bail on 2601. 2002 and the said Court directed him to surrender before the Sessions Judge, Patuakhali with in 3 weeks in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1173 of 2002 and therefore, the petitioner surrendered before the Sessions Judge on 12.02.2002 and prayed for bail but the prayer was rejected and thereafter he filed Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 252 of 2002 before the learned Sessions Judge who by order dated 18.05.2002 rejected the prayer and then he moved the High Court Division for bail in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 6213. of 2002 and obtained a Rule and an order of ad interim bail for a period of six months was also passed which was extended from time to time till the disposal of the Rule on 27.01.2004 and the High Court Division after hearing the parties discharged the Rule by the aforesaid order and directed the petitioner to surrender before the court below within 30 days and the petitioner surrendered accordingly. Hence is this petition.

3. In support of the petition. Mr.Zahirul Haque. the learned Advocate, submits, inter alia, that the petitioner did not misuse the privilege of ad-interim bail granted earlier to him and that the co-accused Mohammad Hasan. Md. Sahabuddin and others have been allowed bail by the High Court Division after making the Rule absolute and the petitioner

being an elected chairman for the greater public interest his prayer for bail ought to have

been considered, but the High Court Division disregarding the above facts passed the impugned order and that General Diary No. 891 dated 21.03.2002 containing allegation of one Mrs. Hosneara being totally unfounded the High Court Division committed error in not allowing bail to the petitioner, putting reliance on the allegations of misuse of bail,

without any basis.

4. It appears from the First information Report that the petitioner gave orders to other accused to assault the victims of the occurrence causing murder of one A. Jalil Munshi and severe injuries to some other victims who had to be sent to Barisal Medical College Hospital for treatment.

5. It also appears that though the charge sheet was submitted the petitioner suppressing the fact moved for bail and thus obtained ad-interim bail from the High Court Division. In consideration of the facts and circumstances the High Court Division appears to have passed the impuened judgment and order discharging the Rule.”

6. We have considered the facts and circumstances disclosed in the case and are of the view that the High Court Division did not commit any error in the decision while passing  the impugned judgment and order. We do not therefore find any reason to sustain the attack. The petition, under the aforesaid circumstance, stands dismissed.

Source: III ADC (2006) 830

Disclaimer:

The information contains in this web-site is prepared for educational purpose. This site may be used by the students, faculties, independent learners and the learned advocates of all over the world. Researchers all over the world have the access to upload their writes up in this site. In consideration of the people’s participation in the Web Page, the individual, group, organization, business, spectator, or other, does hereby release and forever discharge the Lawyers & Jurists, and its officers, board, and employees, jointly and severally from any and all actions, causes of actions, claims and demands for, upon or by reason of any damage, loss or injury, which hereafter may be sustained by participating their work in the Web Page. This release extends and applies to, and also covers and includes, all unknown, unforeseen, unanticipated and unsuspected injuries, damages, loss and liability and the consequences thereof, as well as those now disclosed and known to exist.  The provisions of any state’s law providing substance that releases shall not extend to claims, demands, injuries, or damages which are known or unsuspected to exist at this time, to the person executing such release, are hereby expressly waived. However the Lawyers & Jurists makes no warranty expressed or implied or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product process or service by trade name, trade mark, manufacturer or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation or favouring by the Lawyers & Jurists. The views and opinions of the authors expressed in the Web site do not necessarily state or reflect those of the Lawyers & Jurists. Above all, if there is any complaint drop by any independent user to the admin for any contents of this site, the Lawyers & Jurists would remove this immediately from its site.