The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898), Section 342

Omission to examine the accused under section 342 vitiates conviction if such omission prejudices the accused in leading defence. Section 537 of Cr. Pc cannot cure such omission. 

The Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972; Article 39 and 102

Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1974; Sections 9, 10(3) and 11 

Whether the petitioner has the right to move the writ petition in a representative capacity-

Neither in the Act nor in the Fourth Wage Board Award a right has been created in favour of the petitioner not, an obligation has been imposed upon it. The fact that the petitioner was all along associated with the award‑making process does not make it an "aggrieved person" and the present case is definitely not public interest litigation. The petitioner is not espousing the cause of a downtrodden and deprived section of the community unable to spend money to establish its fundamental rights and enforce its constitutional remedies. It is not acting pro bono publico but in the interest of its members. If the petitioner is refused entry on the threshold point, that will not be the end of the world for newspaper owners and news organisations. Their locus standi as well as means of access to the Courts are without doubt assured.

Bangladesh Parjatan Corporation Service Rules, 1980; Rule 41 sub‑rule (2) Clause (iv)

Whether any reason was required to be assigned for termination of the services of the respondents, who were employees of the Bangladesh Parjatan Corporation, a statutory body, established under PO No. 143 of 1972

This Rule does not require the Corporation to assign any reason or to serve any show‑cause notice, for termination of an officer/employee. This provision for termination is undoubtedly a harsh provision. But a Court cannot declare a law­ invalid on the ground that it is harsh or unjust. If the termination is found to be within the four corners of the law the Court cannot nullify it on the ground that it is harsh or cruel. However there is no such requirement in the Rules to assign reasons for termination. Similarly, the principle of natural justice by serving a show cause notice is also not applicable in this case as this principle has been excluded in the Rule Itself. The appointing authorities have has also the power to reinstate a terminated employee on the merit of his individual case.