Md. Laisur Rahman Vs. Most. Nayma Ara Begum

Appellate Division Cases

(CRIMINAL)

PARTIES

Md. Laisur Rahman …………………………………Appellant

=vs=

Most. Nayma Ara Begum and another………………………Respondents

JUSTICE

Md. Ruhul Amin J

Syed J. R. Mudassir Husain J

JUDEMENT DATE: 16th November, 2003

Section 6(5) (b) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance. 1961, section 6 of the Muslim Family Laws ordinance, 1961.

……. in the background of the facts of the case as well as upon compassionate view of the matter if the substantive sentence of the convict is reduced to the period already under gone upon maintaining the sentence of fine the ends of justice would best be made….(5)

Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 1996. (From the Judgment and Order dated July 21. 1994 passed by the High Court Division Criminal Revision No. 1512 of 1992)

Mr. Md. Nawab Ali. Advoeate-on-reeord. For the Appellant Mr. Sajjcidul Huq, No. 2 Advocate-onrecord. For the Respondent Respondent No. 1 : Not repersented

JUDGMENT

MD RUHUL AMIN J: The appeal, by leave, is by the convict against the convict against the judgment and order dated July 21, 1994 of a Single Bench of the High Court Division in Criminal Revision No. 1512 of 1992 discharging the Rule obtained against the judgment and order dated September 30, 1992 of the Court of Sessions Judge, Dinajpur in Criminal Appeal No. 102 of 1991 dismissing the same. The Criminal Appeal was filed against the judgment and order dated 5.8.1991 of the Court of Additional District Magistral Dinajpur passed in Case No. 366(c) of 1990 convicting the appellant under Section 6(5) (h) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance. 1961 and sentencing him to suffer simple imprisonment tor one year and also to a fine of Tk. 5,000/- in default to suffer 3 months simple imprisonment more.

2. Prosecution case, in short, is that the appellant was that he obtained necessary permission from the Arbitration Council but the same was not accepted the Court since the Chairman of No. 6 Omarpur Union parishad had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition under sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Muslim Family Laws ordinance1961 to grant permission for 2nd marriage.

3. Leave was granted to consider the submission of the learned advocate for the petitioner that the sentence awarded was severs and harsh and that having regard to the nature of the offence and reality of the social life sentence of the convict may be feuded on the above and also on compassionate ground.

4. We have heard the learned Advocate-onrecord and perused the materials on record. The learned Advocate-on-record submits that having regard to the nature of offence and the reality of social life if the sentence of the appellant is reduced to the period already under gone the ends of justice would best be met.

5. We are of the view that in the background of the facts of the case as well as upon compassionate view of the matter if the substantive sentence of the convict is reduced to the period already under gone upon maintaining the sentence of fine the ends of justice would best be made.

6. Accordingly the appeal is allowed on modification of substantive sentence to the period already under gone, but the sentence of fine is maintained.

Ed.

Source : I ADC (2004),33

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.