Search Options

Judgment Search By Title

Displaying 6841-6860 of 8375 results.
AKM Azizul Haque Vs. Government of Bangladesh, 1989, 18 CLC (HCD)


Manu Mia @ Malu Mia &Others Vs. State, 1989, 18 CLC (HCD)


Md. Ismail Vs. State, 2012, 41 CLC (HCD)


Md. Maniruzzaman and another Vs. State, 2011, 40 CLC (HCD)


Sahabuddin Vs. State, 2008, 37 CLC (HCD)


Abbas Ali and others Vs. Sharif Hossain Chowdhury and oth­ers, 2010, 39 CLC (HCD)


Md. Shafiqul Islam Vs. Board of Intermediate and Secondary Education, Comilla, 2006, 35 CLC (HCD)


Abdul Wahab Sheikh Vs. Md. Kamal Hossain alias Md. Kalam Hossain & Others, 2012, 41 CLC (AD)

Whether section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1908 is applicable in determining the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or application by any special law e.g. the Local Government (Upazilla Parishad) Ordinance, 2008 and the Local Government (Upazilla Parishad) Rules, 2008.

The Limitation Act is a general law and it has very clearly provided in its section 29(2) that certain provisions of this Act contained in its section 14 and also in sections 4, 9-13, 15-18 and 22 will be applicable in determining the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, appeal or application by any special law, if such special law does not expressly exclude or restrict application of these provisions. If any special law in prescribing the period of limitation for any suit, appeal or application expressly excludes the applicability of the provisions of any of the aforementioned sections of the Limitation Act then only these sections of the Limitation Act will have no application in any suit, appeal or application under that special law………………………………(10) 


Jaibar Ali Fakir Vs. State, 2008, 37 CLC (HCD)

The Children Act, 1974 (Act No. XXXIX of 1974), section 66

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Act No. V of 1898), sections 164, 342

The Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972, article 35 (4)

The age of the accused at the time of the occurrence and at the time of the alleged confessional statement should be kept in mind. It is an accepted phenomenon that children are impressionable, gullible and more ready to admit guilt for other ulterior reasons. Upon research it has been found that children will falsely confess to have committed a crime when they believe that they may get some benefit as a result. This is illustrated by the excerpts of the article mentioned above………………………………..(21)

It would be entirely unsafe to rely upon the confessional statement of a child, as defined in the Children Act, 1974, without corroboration of the fact that he made the confession voluntarily and knowing the consequence of waiving his right to remain silent. ………………(22)

Although the municipal law of Bangladesh does not provide for presence of any parent, guardian or custodian at the time of recording confessional statement, the children of Bangladesh are no different from the children of any other country and they ought to get the protection of the law so that they do not make false confession or confessions under threat or coercion. . . When children are taken to record their confessional statements, they must be accompanied by a parent, guardian, custodian or legal representative. The Constitution in Article 35(4) gives the citizen the right to remain silent and not to incriminate himself. A mature person can assess the pros and cons in waiving that right when making any confessional statement, but the immature child cannot be expected to fully appreciate the outcome of his action in waiving the right to silence. At that age when he would be deemed not to have the mental capacity in law to sign any contract, agreement or other document, he should not be deemed to have the mental capacity to sign away his fundamental right to remain silent and not to incriminate himself. The Children Act, 1974 provides for special consideration for children who come face to face with the law. They are dealt with differently due to their immaturity and vulnerability. By the same token, children who are produced for questioning by the police or of recording their statement by a Magistrate under section 164 of the CrPC, either as a witness or as an accused, must be dealt with differently adults. They must be accompanied by a parent, guardian, custodian or legal representative…………………………………………(24) 


Paritosh Chandra Nag Vs. Bangladesh represented by Secretary, Ministry of Land, 2008, 37 CLC (HCD)


FR Garments (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Artha Rin Adalat, Dhaka, 2008, 37 CLC (HCD)


Abdul Quader Farazi Vs. Chief Election Commi­ssioner, Bangladesh & others, 1998, 27 CLC (HCD)


Mir Daulat Hossain and another Vs. Secretary, National Sports Council and others, 1998, 27 CLC (HCD)


Sefina Ferdousi @ Shimla and another Vs. Jaohar Kabir and others, 2008, 37 CLC (HCD)

The Guardian of Wards Act, 1890 (Act No. VIII of 1890); section 17

Under section 17 of the Guardian of Wards Act the central consideration in appointing a guardian of a minor child is the welfare of the child, which will be of paramount consideration. A mother who is married to a stranger losses her preferential right of custody over a minor child but that will not totally exclude her from being considered fit for guardianship if she is otherwise held on a consideration of all circumstances in a particular case to be competent to be the guardian of such minor...............................(20)

Custody and guardianship of child

The mother is entitled to the custody of her male child until he has completed the age of seven years and if her female child until she has attained puberty. The right continues though she is divorced, unless she marries a second husband in which case the custody belongs to the father. ……………………………(24)

The law of the custody is not concerned with protecting "proprietary" right asserted by the father over the children, but with the best interests and welfare of the children. The custody should not be given to the undeserving mother to the detriment of the child. The child shall enjoy special protection and shall be given opportunity to enable him to develop physically, mentally, morally, spiritually, and socially in a healthy and normal manner with freedom and dignity, for the best interest of the child shall be paramount consideration. Fortunately, the Principle of Muslim law and guardian and ward Act provides the same………………………………………(25)  


Government of Bangladesh and others Vs. Md. Abdus Sattar and others, 2012, 41 CLC (AD)


Eximpo Trading Limited Vs. MV Banglar Kakoli, 2007, 36 CLC (HCD)


Kamrul Mia and others Vs. State, 2007, 36 CLC (HCD)


Razia Khanam Vs. Md. Shamuzzoha Khan & Others, 2007, 36 CLC (HCD)


Nurul Hoque Vs. Bazal Ahmed and 3 others, 1995, 24 CLC (HCD)


Salam Mollick (Md.) Vs. State, 1996, 25 CLC (HCD)