Martial Law Regulation No. 1 of 1982


Martial Law Regulation No. 1 of 1982


Regulation 3(4)—

When the reviewing authority acted in excess of his power
conferred under regulation 3(4) of the Martial Law Regulation No. 1 of 1982 the
impugned order passed in reviewing by the CMLA converting the judgment of
acquittal into one of conviction is without any lawful authority.

Abdur Rahman vs Bangladesh 49 DLR 344.

 

Martial Law Regulation No. 1 of 1982

 

MARTIAL LAW
REGULATION NO. 1 OF 1982

 

Regulation—3(3)
and 3(5)

A
study of Regulation 3(3) and 3(5) will show that immediately after the
termination of all proceedings before a Summary Martial Law Court (SMLC) the
proceeding should be submitted to the relevant authority for review. in
regulation 3 there is no provision enabling the aggrieved party himself to file
a review application against the judgment and order passed by a SMLC. The
mandatory provision is that after termination of the proceeding the record
should be submitted for review to the competent authority.

In
the present case after termination of SMLC No. 51 of 1982 it was not submitted
before the competent authority for review. In the absence of such assertion
this Court is not inclined to believe that the said judgment was not eventually
submitted for review as contemplated under Regulation No. 3 of M.L.R. 1 of 1982
and was not disposed of in due course. The law does not provide for further
review at the instance of an aggrieved party and as such there is no reason to
assume that a review petition is in fact pending before any authority for which
a forum is required to be created.

Mr. Abdul Hakim
Vs Govt. of Bangladesh and others, 17 BLD (HCD) 317.

Ref:
42 DLR 1; 42 DLR (AD) 241; 13 BLD (1993)(AD) 17;—Cited.