Appellate Division
85 election officials won’t get back job: Appellate Division
The Appellate Division has scrapped a decade-old judgment pronounced by the Administrative Appellate Tribunal, due to which 85 upazila election officials who were recruited during the BNP-Jamaat alliance government won’t be getting their jobs back.
A six-member bench headed by Chief Justice Hasan Foez Siddiqui pronounced the judgment on Thursday, accepting the state’s appeal against the tribunal’s decision.
During the hearing, Attorney General AM Amin Uddin and Additional Attorney Generals Sheikh Mohammad Morshed and Mohammad Mehedi Hasan stood for the state, while lawyers AF Hasan Arif, Prabir Niyogi, Salah Uddin Dolon and Kamrul Haque Siddiqui represented the plaintiffs.
According to the court, the BNP-Jamaat government appointed a total of 327 upazila election officials through the Public Service Commission (PSC) on September 3, 2005. The recruitment stirred widespread controversy which led to an evaluation of the officials by the caretaker government in 2007.
The evaluation resulted in dismissal of 85 election officials.
Read: Labour law violation: Appellate Division to hear Dr Yunus’s petition on Oct 17
The sacked officials filed a case against the government decision with the Administrative Appellate Tribunal and got rejected. However, on April 12, 2010, the tribunal accepted an appeal filed by the ex-election officials and pronounced a judgment in favor of their reinstatement.
The prosecution filed a total of four leave to appeal after the tribunal’s judgment, based on which a chamber court of the Appellate Division stayed the effectiveness of the tribunal’s judgment and sent the case to a full bench of the Appellate Division on April 29, 2010.
In 2011, the prosecution filed another appeal, which started the hearing process that was concluded on August 28, 2022.
Labour law violation: Appellate Division to hear Dr Yunus’s petition on Oct 17
A chamber court of the Appellate Division has fixed October 17 to hear a petition filed by Nobel laureate Dr Muhammad Yunus against a High Court order rejecting his plea to dispose the labour law violation case against him.
Chamber Judge M Enayetur Rahim fixed the date on Wednesday. Senior Lawyer Abdullah Al Mamun stood for Dr Yunus, while Md Khurshid Alam Khan represented the labour court.
Md Arifuzzaman, a labour inspector of the Department of Inspection for Factories and Establishments (DIFE), lodged a case with Dhaka Third Labour Court against Dr Yunus and three other people accusing them of breaching the Labour Act on September 9, 2021.
Read: Appellate Division declares Tareq's wife Zubaida a fugitive
Yunus filed a petition before the High Court seeking cancellation of the case. On December 12, the High Court put a stay order on the proceedings of the case and issued a rule asking why the case won’t be scrapped.
The prosecution then filed a petition with the Appellate Division asking for resuming the trial proceedings. On June 13, 2022, the Appellate Division ordered the High Court to dispose of the rule within two months.
On August 17, the High Court nullified its ruling and pronounced a verdict on the petition filed by Dr Yunus.
On August 24, 2022, Yunus filed a petition with the Appellate Division against the High Court’s verdict, the hearing date of which was fixed today.
Wrongful imprisonment: Appellate Division orders Brac Bank to compensate Jaha Alam
The chamber judge of the Appellate Division has ordered Brac Bank to provide Tk 5 lakh within seven working days, of the total Tk 15 lakh it was directed to pay by a High Court as compensation to Jaha Alam, a jute mill worker from Tangail who was falsely tried in a loan scam case and spent three years in jail without committing any crime.
After hearing a petition filed by the bank for a stay order on the High Court’s verdict directing it to provide compensation, Justice M Enayetur Rahim passed the order on Monday. Besides, the court fixed October 31 for a hearing on Brac Bank’s petition in front of a full bench of the Appellate Division.
During the hearing, senior advocate Md Khurshid Alam Khan appeared for the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), while Md Asaduzzaman stood for Brac Bank.
On September 30, 2020, the High Court in a verdict warned the ACC and ordered Brac Bank authorities to pay Tk 15 lakh as compensation to Jaha Alam within 30 days of receiving a copy of the verdict, which was published on August 7, 2022. The bank filed a writ petition asking for a stay order on the verdict, on which today’s hearing was conducted.
Read: ACC goes to HC seeking cancellation of Samrat’s bail
In 2012, the ACC filed a total of 33 cases against three people, including one Abu Salek, for embezzling Tk 18.50 crore from Sonali Bank through cheque fraud. Brac Bank was one of the 18 banks where the frauds had cleared cheques.
While investigators were trying to unearth the identities of the culprits, two officials of Brac Bank had identified Jaha Alam as Abu Salek, leading to the former landing in jail and spending three years behind bars, with no connection to any crime that may have been committed.
The investigators however have failed to provide any good reason for the oversight, if that, by Brac Bank officers to avert them either prior to Alam's arrest, or in those three years that he remained incarcerated.
Nevertheless, both the High Court and the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court have asked Brac Bank to compensate Jaha Alam.
Houses of Speaker, Dy Speaker on Parliament premises are legal: SC
The appellate division of the Supreme Court on Tuesday annulled a High Court order that declared the houses built for the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker on the premises of Jatiya Sangsad as illegal.
A three-judge bench, led by Chief Justice Hasan Foez Siddque, passed the order in the wake of a writ petition.
Barrister Tanjib Ul Alam represented the petitioner’s side, while Additional Attorney General Sheikh Mohammad Morshed appeared for the state during the hearing.
In 2003, Bangladesh Poribesh Andolon (BAPA) and the Institute of Architects filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the legality of the construction of the two houses on the Parliament premises, citing violation of the original design by renowned architect Louis I Kahn.
Also read: HC forms expert committee to prevent plagiarism in PhD thesis
Construction work began in 2002.
On June 21, 2004, the High Court passed an order on the petition saying the construction of the new buildings were illegal and directed to declare the National Parliament House as "national heritage".
Later, the appellate division suspended the High Court’s order after an appeal from the state and granted them leave to appeal against the order.
Subsequently, the state's lawyers submitted a regular appeal against the High Court’s order. In the meantime, the construction of the residential buildings of the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker was completed.
Also read: HC directs to protect 952 ponds in Rajshahi city
In 2015, during a hearing on the appeal, the appellate division asked the state to present the original design of Louis I Kahn, which it did later.
Rajshahi double murder: SC acquits two death-row convicts, commutes sentence of another
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court on Thursday acquitted two death-row convicts and commuted the sentence of another in a case for killing a woman and her daughter in 2008.
A three-member bench of the Appellate Division led by Justice Hasan Foez Siddique passed the order and asked the authorities concerned to free the convicts from the condemn cell as soon as possible.
Those acquitted are Ismail Hossain Babu and Sonadi.
The SC also commuted the death sentence of Tariqul Islam to life imprisonment in the case.
Read:SC suspends bail order by HC to Regent’s Shahed in arms case
Advocate Helal Uddin Molla stood for the petitioner while deputy attorney general Bashir Ahmed represented the state.
Miliara Khatun and her daughter Parveen of Godagari upazila in Rajshahi district were killed on October 10, 2006.
In 2008, a court in Rajshahi sentenced Ismail, Sonadi and Tariqul to death in the double murder case.
Later, the convicts filed separate appeal petitions before the High Court.
In 2014, the High Court upheld the death sentence of the convicts.
AD sets Jun. 28 to hear appeal against HC's declaration of commercial spots in Hatirjheel as illegal
The chamber judge of the Appellate Division has not stayed a judgment of the High Court declaring all hotels and restaurants allotted in the Hatirjheel-Begunbari project area illegal.
The leave to appeal filed by the Rajdhani Unnayan Kartripakkha (Rajuk) against the High Court judgment will be heard before a bench of the Appellate Division on June 28.
Chamber Judge of the Appellate Division Justice M Enayetur Rahim passed the order to this effect on Sunday.
Attorney General AM Amin Uddin appeared for Rajuk, while senior lawyer Manzil Morshed represented the writ petitioner.
Earlier, Human Rights and Peace for Bangladesh (HRPB), a rights organisation, filed a writ petition with the High Court as public interest litigation annexing a news report published on 1 August in 2018.
Read: Publish list of pollutants: HC
Later, the High Court bench of Justice Md Ashraful Kamal and Justice Rajik Al Jalil declared the operative part of the verdict disposing of a rule in this regard on 30 June 2021.
The same court released a 55 page verdict with four directives and nine recommendations, including the eviction of all commercial establishments from the Hatirjheel-Begunbari project area within 60 days.
In the full text verdict, the HC declared the Hatirjheel-Begunbari project in the capital a 'public trust property' and all commercial establishments there, including hotels, restaurants, and shops, in the project area, illegal.
The court cancelled the allotment of all hotels, restaurants, and other commercial establishments in the Hatirjheel-Begunbari project area and asked the authorities to remove all kinds of commercial establishments from the project area within 60 days of receiving a copy of the verdict.
Read: 4,000 medical teams ready to provide health care in 11 flood-hit districts
In the full-text verdict, the High Court suggested forming a 'Hatirjheel Lake Preserve, Development and Management Authority' under the direct supervision of the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) in order to preserve, develop, and operate the Hatirjheel-Begunbari project.
It also suggested appointing BUET's engineering department and the 24th Engineering Construction Brigade of the Bangladesh Army as permanent consultants for the project.
It asked that international standard underground public toilets and potable water be arranged in the project area for people to use.
The court also directed that the water taxi service currently in operation be stopped and recommended to create side roads, bicycle lanes and separate lanes for the physically challenged. To make the lake a fish sanctuary. The Hatirjheel-Begunbari project is named after Sir Jagadish Chandra Bose, the famed Bengali scientist who was a contemporary as well as a collaborator of Albert Einstein.
The High Court also recommended that the cost of conservation, development and operation of the entire Hatirjheel and Begunbari projects be allocated from the revenue budget.
SC suspends bail order by HC to Regent’s Shahed in arms case
The Appellate Division on Sunday suspended the bail order by the High Court to Regent Group chairman Mohammad Shahed in an arms case, where he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
The Appellate Division Chamber Justice M Enayetur Rahim suspended the bail order following the state's petition.
Also read:Regent hospital scam: Ex-DGHS DG, 5 others indicted
The court fixed August 1 for the hearing of the petition filed by the state.
Deputy Attorney General Biswajit Debnath and Deputy Attorney General Md Bashir Ullah represented the state in the court while senior lawyer SM Shahjahan appeared for Shahed.
Earlier in the day, a Dhaka court framed charges against Shahed with five others, including former director general of the Directorate General of Health Services (DGHS) Abul Kalam Azad, in a case over Regent Hospital’s fake Covid test report scam.
Regent Group Chairman Shahed was sentenced to life imprisonment in arms cases on September 28 in 2020 by the lower court.
The court also jailed him for seven years under section 19 (F) of the same case.
Later, Shahed sought bail by appealing to the High Court against the sentence. The High Court granted him bail on June 7.
On July 6, 2020, Rab raided the Uttara and Mirpur branches of Regent Hospital. During the operation, fake Covid test reports, and various irregularities including collection of money from patients in the name of Covid treatment were unveiled.
Also read: Trial begins against Regent’s Shahed in ACC case
The next day, a case was filed against 17 people at Uttara West Police Station.
On July 15, from the border area of Satkhira, Regent Group and Regent Hospital Chairman Shahed was arrested by RAB. Shahed has been in jail since then.
More than 36 cases have been filed against Shahed on allegations of different irregularities.
Haji Salim's bail application rejected
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court on Monday rejected the bail petition of Awami League lawmaker Haji Salim in a graft case.
Chamber Judge of the Appellate Division Justice M Enayetur Rahim refused to pass an order and fixed August 1 for hearing the petition in the full-bench of the Appellate division.
Advocate Syed Ahmed Raza stood for Salim.
On May 24, Salim moved the Supreme Court, seeking quashing of his 10-year prison sentence handed down by a lower court in the graft case.
Haji Salim's counsel Syed Ahmed Raza, submitted the plea to the Appellate Division of the apex court.
A bail petition was also submitted in the same case filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), he said.
On May 22, Salim was sent to jail in this case by a Dhaka court following his surrender.
After spending a night in jail, he was admitted to Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU) on the following day.
Also Read: Haji Selim returns home obeying law: Home Minister
Haji Salim, who was sentenced to 10 years in jail in the graft case, went to Bangkok for treatment on May 2 and returned home on May 5, sparking a huge controversy.
On February 10, the full text of the High Court’s order was published upholding his 10-year imprisonment.
The HC had earlier asked him to surrender before the trial court within 30 days of getting the order and also directed the trial court to cancel the bail order of the MP and issue an arrest warrant against him "if he does not surrender within the given time".
ACC lawyer Khurshid Alam said, “After this order, Haji Salim has lost the eligibility to remain an MP according to the Article 66 (2) of the Constitution.”
On March 9 last year, the HC bench of justices Md Moinul Islam Chowdhury and AKM Zahirul Huq upheld the lower court order sentencing him to 10 years in jail after hearing a petition by the ACC.
At the same time, the Dhaka-7 MP was acquitted of a three-year jail term in the same case filed by the ACC for concealing wealth information.
The High Court also reduced the fine imposed on Salim by half to Tk 10 lakh. He will have to spend one more year in jail if he fails to pay the fine.
In 2007, the ACC filed the case against Salim. On April 27, 2008, a Dhaka court jailed him for 13 years and fined Tk 20 lakh.
Salim moved the High Court against the order. In 2011, the court overturned his sentence but the ACC later appealed against the lower court order.
Later, the Appellate Division had asked the High Court to re-hear the petition.
Irregularities of Salim resurfaced after his son Irfan Salim was arrested for assaulting a Navy official in 2020.
SC rejects Japanese woman’s plea to go abroad with her kids
The Supreme Court on Thursday rejected a Japanese woman's plea to go abroad with her two children.
A six-member full bench of the Appellate Division, headed by Chief Justice Hasan Foez Siddique, also dismissed a contempt plea of the Japanese woman, Nakano Erico, to haul her estranged husband, Bangladesh-born US citizen Imran Sharif.
Besides, the court also refused to entertain Imran's contempt plea against Erico for "disobeying an earlier court order".
Also read: 2 kids to stay with Japanese mother until deposal of case at family court
On May 17, Erico’s counsel Sishir Monir appealed to the Appellate Division seeking permission for his client to travel abroad with her two children.
Erico has spent many days in Bangladesh with her two daughters and wants to go abroad for a vacation that can be to Japan, according to the plea.
At the same time, Erico asked the court to press contempt of court charges against Imran for not following the Supreme Court's order on meeting their two children.
Later, Imran also filed a contempt of court plea against Erico alleging disobedience of the High Court order to allow him to meet their two children.
On February 13, the Appellate Division ordered disposal of the case within three months over the custody of the two children of Imran and Erico at a family court.
During this period, the court made it clear that the two daughters will stay with their Japanese mother in Bangladesh. And Imran can meet them but can’t leave the country.
As per the order of the Appellate Division, the two children have been in the custody of their mother since December 12 last year. However, their father can visit them every day at a convenient time between 9am and 9pm.
On November 21 last year, the HC bench of justices M Enayetur Rahim and Md Mostafizur Rahman ruled that the Japan-born daughters of Imran and Erico will stay with their father.
However, the mother can exclusively meet the daughters, aged 11 and 10, three times a year for 10 days at a time and Imran, the father, will have to bear her travel and accommodation expenses, the court had said.
Also read:2 kids to stay with Japanese mother till Feb 6: SC
On December 5, Erico filed a petition with the Appellate Division challenging the High Court's order.
After 12 years of marriage, on January 18 last year, Erico, a physician, appealed for divorce from engineer Imran over marital dispute.
On January 28, 2021, she also filed a case with a Tokyo family court for the custody of their three children.
But on February 21, Imran returned to Bangladesh with their two girls from Japan. After that a Japanese court passed an order giving the children under their mother’s custody.
On August 19, Erico filed a writ petition in the High Court here seeking custody of the two girls.
Appellate Division declares Tareq's wife Zubaida a fugitive
The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court has said that the High Court violated the constitution in hearing the case of the fugitive accused Dr Zubaida Rahman, wife of BNP senior vice chairman Tareq Rahman.
A full text of the judgment given by the Appellate Division was published on Wednesday dismissing the leave to appeal filed by Zubaida seeking dismissal of the case filed for acquiring assets from unknown sources.
The Appellate Division also declared Zubaida a fugitive.
At the same time, the High Court gave extra benefits to Zubaida violation of the constitution, reads the judgment.
On April 13, a four-judge bench of the Appellate Division headed by Chief Justice Hasan Foez Siddique dismissed the leave to appeal of Zubaida and delivered a brief judgment.
The judgment was written by Justice Borhanuddin. Appellate Division Justice Md Nuruzzaman and Justice M Enayetur Rahim and the Chief Justice agreed with the judgment.
As per the judgement, the judicial court did not take cognizance of the charges against Zubaida in the corruption case. “Where the charges were not taken into account, how did she apply for dismissal of the case under section 561A of Code of Criminal Procedure?” asked the Appellate Division.
READ: HC defers Tarique-Zubaida’s hearing in corruption case
And when she filed the appeal without surrendering before the court, she was a fugitive in the eyes of the law. But a bench of the High Court has issued a rule suspending the trial of the case after hearing the plea of a fugitive, said Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) lawyer Khurshid Alam Khan.
If a person or accused is a fugitive, he/she cannot file any writ, criminal case or any legal action except surrender. But the High Court has violated the law by giving more benefits to Zubaida Rahman, he added.
The Appellate Division further said all citizens are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection of the law according to Article 27 of the Constitution. Judges of the Supreme Court of the country have taken an oath to conduct justice without fear or bias. In any case, the judiciary must adhere to this principle. The judiciary will not set a precedent that does not apply to everyone.
ACC filed the case against Tarique, his wife Zubaida and her mother Syeda Iqbal Mand Banu accusing them of amassing illegal wealth and concealing information in wealth statements, with Kafrul police station on September 26, 2007. The accused later filed a petition challenging the legality of the case proceedings.
Later in the same year, the High Court issued a rule suspending the proceedings on the application of Jobaida Rahman.
On April 12 in 2018, the High Court gave its judgement dismissing the rule issued to dismiss the case. At the same time, Zubaida Rahman was ordered to surrender before the court within eight weeks.
Zubaida then filed a leave to appeal in the Appellate Division against the judgment of the High Court.
Lawyers say Zubaida, livimg in the UK, is a fugitive in the case and will now have to go to jail after surrendering. She will then be able to appeal for bail.