Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)– 432
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Druto Bichar Tribunal Ain [XXVIII of 2002]
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
Section 6–
No stringent provision has been
incorporated in the new law even regarding bail. There is no reason how this
reduction of the time limit will affect the petitioners when the other
conditions relating to trial remains the same. Article 35 clearly provides that
a person accused of a criminal offence shall have the right to a speedy trial.
Muhibur Rahman Manik anrl others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 10(4) –
No provision has been made in the
Ain to the effect that the case shall be concluded at any cost within the
specified time by giving go–bye to the established principles of trial causing
no prejudice to an accused.
Muhibur Rahman Manik and others vs
Bangladesh and others 55 DLR 636.
Section 4(4)–
There is no bar to use the
beneficial part in a statute, if any, in favour of the accused in the matter of
holding his trial.
Abdul Kader Mirza and another vs
Bangladesh and others 56 DLR 31.
40 pages