Md. Shahidul Islam @ Shahid Vs. The State, 2 LNJ (2013) 197

Case No: Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 51269 of 2012

Judge: Syed Md. Ziaul Karim,

Court: High Court Division,,

Advocate: Mr. M.A. Mannan Mahon,Mr. Md. Azizul Haq,Mr. Md. Ensan Uddin Sheikh,,

Citation: 2 LNJ (2013) 197

Case Year: 2013

Appellant: Md. Shahidul Islam @ Shahid

Respondent: The State

Subject: Bail,

Delivery Date: 2013-01-07

HIGH COURT DIVISION
(Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)
 
Syed Md. Ziaul Karim, J.
And
Ashish Ranjan Das, J.

Judgment

07.01.2013
 
Md. Shahidul Islam Alias Shahid
. . . Accused-petitioner.
-Versus-
The State
...Opposite Party
 
 
Code of Criminal Procedure (V of 1898)
Section 498
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Sections 395 and 397
It transpires that the petitioner was not named in the F.I.R., three accused namely Shahidul Islam (petitioner) Tajul Islam and Sakil made confession, of them accused Sakil was granted bail by the Court below, the record indicates that the petitioner was arrested on 13.12.2009 and since then he has been in custody. The case is still pending for trial and no witness has yet been examined. It is held that undue delay in holding trial is a valid ground for granting bail and there is no material to discriminate the case of petitioner from the co-accused, who has been enlarged on bail by the Court below. Accordingly, the petitioner was enlarged on bail. …(17).

Mr. Md. Azizul Haq, Advocate,
…. For the petitioner.`

Mr. M. A. Mannan Mahon, D.A.G. with
Mr. Md. Ensan Uddin Sheikh, A.A.G. and
Mr. Md. Osman Goni, A.A.G.    
. . . For the  opposite party.

Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 51269 of 2012
 
JUDGMENT
Syed Md. Ziaul Karim, J:
 
Supplementary affidavit filed to-day do form part of the main petition.

By this Rule, the petitioner Md. Shahidul Islam alias Shahid, sought for bail in S. T. Case no. 533 of 2010 arising out of Hathazari Police Station Case no. 12(12)2009, corresponding to G.R. no. 301 of 2009 under Sections 395, 397 of the Penal Code, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, first Court, Chittagong.

Facts in brief are that on 10-12-2009 informant Md. Nizamuddin lodged an FIR against one  accused namely Md. Tajul Islam alleging that on the night following 09-12-2009 at 02.00 hrs – 02.15 hrs all accused forcibly entered into his shop and committed dacoity and plundered all the commodities. The locals nabbed four accused, of whom three accused beaten to death and only FIR named accused Tazul Islam was seriously wounded. With these allegations the informant lodged the FIR.

During investigation three accused including the petitioner made confession implicating themselves into the commission of offence of dacoity.

The Police after investigation submitted charge sheet accusing the petitioner and two others. The case is still pending before the Additional Sessions Judge, first Court, Chitta-ong for trial and no witness has yet been examined.

The learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was arrested on 13-12-2009 since then he is in custody. He adds that the confession was extracted from him under torture and coercion.  He lastly submits that co-accused Sakil who also made confess-ion was granted bail by the Court below. So the petitioner is also entitled to be enlarged on bail.

The Rule is opposed by the learned Deputy Attorney General however he submits that as the petitioner is in custody since long so he has nothing to submit.

In order to appreciate their submissions we have gone through the record and given our anxious consideration to their submissions.

On going to the materials on record it transpires that the name of the petitioner do not appear in the FIR. Moreso, three accused namely Sahidul Islam(petitioner), Tazul Islam and Sakil made confession, of whom accused Sakil was granted bail by the Court below. The record indicates that the petitioner was arrested on 13-12-2009 since then he is in custody. The case is still pending for trial and no witness has yet been examined. Therefore, we hold that undue delay in holding trial is a valid ground for granting bail. Moreso there is no material to discriminate the case of the petitioner from the co-accused who has been enlarged on bail by the Court below. Thus we are inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.

In the result the Rule is made absolute. Let the petitioner Md. Shahidul Islam alias Shahid be released on bail on furnishing bail bond to the satisfaction of learned Additional Sessions Judge, first Court, Chittagong.

The learned Judge of the Court below is at liberty to cancel the bail of the petitioner, if he misuses the privilege of bail in any manner whatsoever.

Office is directed to communicate the order at once.

Ed.