X -Versus-The State




An application for bail




S/o, Y

Village: Kalirchar

P.S.: Monohardi

Distrcit: Narsingdi




1. The State represented by Deputy

Commissioner, Narsingdi

-Opposite party

2. Z

S/o, late K

Village: Montola

P.S.: Monorhardi

District: Narsingdi

-Informant-opposite party



Monohardi Thana Case No. 11 dated 21.11.2008 lodged against the accused-petitioner u/s 341, 323, 379, 354, 326, 307, 596 of the Penal Code, 1860 arising out G.R. Case No. 610/08.

The humble petition of the above named petitioner most respectfully-


  1. That the petitioner is a law-abiding and peace loving permanent citizen of Bangladesh. He comes from established and respected Muslim family and has the reputation as patron for education in the society. The petitioner is the senior teacher (Computer) of the Khidirpur (Bohumukhi) High School at Khidirpur, Monohardi, Narsingdi.
  1. That the prosecution case in brief is that on 14.11.2008 at about 10 a.m. the victim was coming from Khidirpur to Montola, the accused near the house of accused no. 3, obstructed the victim’s path and the accused-petitioner told the victim to withdraw the Acid Case lodged against them. Then the accused No. 3 ordered other accused to attack. Being instructed by the accused no. 3, the accused-petitioner attacked the left side of head of the victim by “Da” and the victim was seriously injured. The victim was taken to home and later on got admitted in the Monohardi Hospital. The victim is now under treatment in the Monohardi Hospital.
  1. That the real facts are that the petitioner has been teaching as computer teacher with prominence since 16.05.2003 in the Khidirpur High School. The accused-petitioner was in the School on the date and at the time of alleged offence. The Upa-zilla Academic Supervisor conducted a survey on the date of the alleged offence. On that day’s survey all teachers and staffs of the school attended the school compulsorily. The accused-petitioner also attended the school from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Therefore, the alleged offence was beyond the knowledge of the accused-petitioner.
  1. That the prosecution case is full of false, vague and frivolous stories and made only to harass and humiliate the petitioner.
  1. That the Upa-zila Secondary Education officer and acting head teacher of the School certify that the petitioner was in the school at the time of the alleged offence.
  1. That all teachers of the School in letter being dated 25.11.2008 certify that the petitioner was in the school at the time of the alleged offence. They also stated that the allegation against the petitioner is baseless.
  1. That being apprehension of arrest, the petitioner surrendered before Division Bench of the Honourable High court Division comprising of his lordship Mr. justice Syed A.B. Mahmudul Huq and his lordship Mr. Justice Moyeenul Islam Chowdhury.
  1. That their lordships were pleased to enlarge the petitioner on ad-interim anticipatory bail for a period of 2 (two) months or till police report, whichever is earlier.
  2. That since the police report is already submitted before the expiry of two months, the petitioner requires the bail from the honorable Court.
  1. That in the above premises, the accused petitioner begs to file this application for bail before the learned Court on the following amongst other-


I. For that the petitioner is in his School for the purpose of survey at the time of alleged offence which is certified by the school head teacher and Upa-zilla Education officer.

II. For that the Honorable High Court Division was satisfied to enlarge the petitioner on bail after perusal of all records.

III. For that informant submitted the Ejahar 8 days after the alleged attack and did not explain why he was late in submitting the Ejahar.

IV. For that the investigation officer being biased submitted the charge sheet most illegally

V. For that the prosecution did not submit any medical certificate of the injury of the victim.

VI. For that there was no eye witness of the alleged offence. No witness in their statement u/s 161 said that they saw the petitioner was in the place of alleged offence.

VII. For that the petitioner’s father is the Chairman of the Khidirpur Union parishad for last 28 years. The motive of the allegation is also tarnish the image of his father’s family.

VIII. For that the petitioner is the prominent school teacher of the school. The allegation is brought against him only to humiliate in the society.

IX. For that the petitioner is in high position of the society and therefore, there is no chance of absconsion, if he is enlarged on bail.

Wherefore, it is humbly prayed that your Honour would graciously be pleased to allow the petitioner to go on bail for the ends of justice.

And for this acts of kindness the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray.