Jalal alias Md. Jalal Vs. The State

Appellate Division Cases

(Criminal)

PARTIES

Jalal alias Md. Jalal…………….. Appellant

-Vs-

The State……………………. Respondent

JUSTICES

Mohammad Fazlul Karim J

Amirul Kabir Chowdhury J

Md. Joynul Abedin J

Judgment Dated: 17th April 2007

The Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 265C

The Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Damon Ain, 2000, Section ll(Kha)& 30

His stay in Saudi Arabia other members of his family used to assault Mossammat Fatema Akhtar for dowry which forced her to leave her husband’s house ……….(2)

It appears that Abu Taher maternal uncle of victim Fatema Akhtar in the First Information Report stated categorically that while his niece Fatema Akhtar used to reside in the house of her father-in-law the accused appellant Jalal and others used to put pressure on various occasions for dowry and also assaulted her and that on the date of occurrence i.e. on 18.07.2000 coming to know about arrival of the husband of Fatema Akhtar from abroad the informant went to his house with his niece Fatema Akhtar and then on the plea of a trifling matter they started altercations and at one stage at the investigation of other accused (including the accused appellant Jalal) the husband of his niece demanded Tk.1,00,000/- as dowry and on her refusal to pay the sum she was assaulted seriously causing injuries on her person and on hearing hue and cry witnesses appeared and then Fatema Akhtar was rescued from the clutch of the accused and was rushed to the hospital for treatment and was admitted there for treatment ………..(11)

It further appears though the Investigating Officer submitted a final report making lengthy statements, he admitted to have received the medical report as to the injuries on the person of the victim…………….. (12)

Is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly dismissed…………… (17)

Khondaker Mahbub Hossain, Senior Advocate instructed by Md. Aftab Hossain, dvocate-on-Record …………….For the Appellant

Golam Kibria, DeputyAttorney General instructed by B. Hossain, Advocate-on-Record …………………………..For the Respondent

Criminal Appeal No.09 of 2003

(From the judgment and order dated 21.05.2002 passed by the High Court Division in Criminal Appeal No.3145 of 2000.)

JUDGMENT

Amirul Kabir Chowdhury J : This appeal by way of leave at the instance of the accused appellant Jalal alias Md. Jalal arises against the judgment and order dated 21.05.2002 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court Division in Criminal Appeal No.3145 of 2000 dismissing the appeal.

2. The facts, in short, are that Mossammat Fatema Akhtar, a niece of informant Abu

Taher got married to accused Abu Hanif. After marriage her husband went to Saudi Arabia with the help of his in-laws for earning his livelihood. During his stay in Saudi Arabia other members of his family used to assault Mossammat Fatema Akhtar for dowry which forced her to leave her husband’s house. On 18.07.2000 when the accused, Abu Hanif, returned home from Saudi Arabia the informant went with Mossammat Fatema Akhtar to call on him. The accused demanded taka one lac as dowry and when refused the accused petitioner and other accused physically tortured Mossammat Fatema Akhtar and she had to be taken to Amtali Hospital for treatment.

3. Thereafter, the informant lodged the F.I.R. with Amtali P.S. and the Amtali P.S. Case No. 12 dated 18.07.2000 under Sections ll(kha) and 30 of the Nari-0 Shishu Nirjatan Damon Am, 2000 hereinafter, referred to as the Ain, was registered. After investigation a final report was however submitted.

4. The Informant filed a Naraji petition against the final report before the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Damon Tribunal, Barguna.

5. The learned Tribunal on hearing both sides accepted the Naraji petition, and rejected the final report in respect of the accused and took cognizance against some of the accused including the petitioner under Sections ll(kha) and 30 of Ain and discharged other accused. It also rejected the application of the appellant and others filed under Section 265C of the Code of Criminal Procedure and framed charges against them under Sections ll(Kha) and 30 of the Ain and fixed a date for trial.

6. Being aggrieved by the order of the learned Tribunal, the appellant and his brother Abu Hanif preferred Criminal Appeal No.3145 of 2000 before the High Court Division which has ultimately been dismissed by the impugned juagment and order.

7. Leave was granted to consider the submissions made on behalf of the appellant that the High Court Division committed error of law in failing to consider that while taking cognizance the learned Tribunal exercised the jurisdiction given in second proviso to Section 27(1) of the Ain most arbitrarily without holding any inquiry and that the second proviso having provided no guideline or procedure to be followed by the Tribunal for its satisfaction, it was incumbent on it to follow the procedure laid down in the Code of

Criminal Procedure for taking cognizance on a petition of complaint or that to exercise the discretion judiciously the Tribunal should have either discharged the accused or directed further investigation or follow the procedure laid down in Sections 200,202 and 203 of the Code.

8. In support of the petition Mr. Khondaker Mahbub Hossain, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has taken us through the impugned judgment and other materials on record and reiterated submissions made earlier on behalf of the appellant.

9. He further submits that the High Court Division committed error in dismissing the appeal without considering the fact that the police report i.e. final report submitted in the case indicates absolute innocence of the accused appellant and more-so, in the First Information Report there is no material constituting any offence alleged under Sections ll(Kha) or 30 of the Ain and as such the impugned judgment of the High Court Division cannot sustain.

10. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions.

11. It appears that Abu Taher maternal uncle of victim Fatema Akhtar in the First Information Report stated categorically that while his niece Fatema Akhtar used to

reside in the house of her father-in-law the accused appellant Jalal and others used to

put pressure on various occasions for dowry and also assaulted her and that on the date of occurrence i.e. on 18.07.2000 coming to know about arrival of the husband of Fatema Akhtar from abroad the informant went to his house with his niece Fatema Akhtar and then on the plea of a trifling matter they started altercations and at one stage at the investigation of other accused (including the accused appellant Jalal) the husband of his niece demanded Tk.1,00,000/- as dowry and on her refusal to pay the sum she was assaulted seriously causing injuries on her person and on hearing hue and cry witnesses appeared and then Fatema Akhtar was rescued from the clutch of the accused and was rushed to the hospital for treatment and was admitted there for treatment.

12. It further appears though the Investigating Officer submitted a final report making lengthy statements, he admitted to have received the medical report as to the injuries on the person of the victim.

13. Be that as it may, the Tribunal under the provision of Section 27(1) of the Ain exercised the jurisdiction vested to the tribunal to take cognizance of the offence.

14. We have perused the impugned judgment of the High Court Division. The learned Judges have elaborately discussed the provision of law including Section 27(1) of the Ain and also Sections ll(Kha) and 30 of the Ain and found that the Tribunal took cognizance on the basis of materials and dismissed the appeal.

15. We have perused the First Information Report and are of the view that it disclosed

materials constituting offence punishable under Sections ll(Kha) and 30 of the Ain and we do not find anything wrong in the order of the Tribunal taking cognizance against the accused appellant.

16. We have also perused the impugned judgment of the High Court Division. In the facts and circumstances we are unable to appreciate the submissions made on behalf of the appellant and as such do not find any ground to interference.

17. In this view of the matter the appeal is liable to be dismissed and it is accordingly

dismissed.

Source : V ADC (2008),534

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.