March 3, 2024, 6:18 pm

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995

NARI-O-SHISHU NIRJATAN (SPECIAL PROVISION) AIN, 1995 (XVIII, OF 1995)

Sections-2 (Cha), 10 and 11

Dowry

The word ‘dowry’ used in sections 11 and 10 of the Ain shall have to be understood in its ordinary meaning, namely property brought by woman to her husband at marriage or vice versa. (dowry) has been used in these sections of the Ain not only to mean property or valuable security agreed to be given at the time or before or after the marriage but also property etc. demanded after the marriage for which there was no previous agreement.

Dipak Kumar Roy alias Kazal Vs. The State,

18 BLD (11HCD) 392.

Ref: 46 DLR (AD) 169—relied

Section 2(GA) read with

Penal Code [IXLV of 1860]

Section 375

Mere penetration is sufficient to constitute rape.

it has been settled by so many decisions Of-the apex courts of this region that even complete penetration is not essential to constitute rape and even partial penetration with or without emission of semen rupture of hymen is sufficient to constitute rape. It may be mentioned here that section 2(N) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishes Bidhan) Ain,1995 has explained, rape thus al©Y kãwU• ‘Penal Code (Act XLV of 1860)-Gi section Gi section G D‡jøwLZ rape” kãwUi b¨vq GKB A_© enb Kwi‡e| According to section 375 of Penal Code mere penetration is sufficient to constitute rape. (Criminal).

Sayed Sajjad Mainuddin -vs.-The State

9 A LR (2017)(1)-AD-189

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995

Section 6(2) read with

Evidence Act (1 of 1872)

Section 114(g)

Criminal Trial (Benefit of Doubt)

169 Some Important Criminal Laws

No independent witness was examined no neighbouring witness was examined, one witness

stated, that he could not say which clothes were worn by the accused, later stated that the accused-

store pant and shirt, another witness stated that accused wore lungi and gang’, no sign of rape was

there while the victim, was examined by the doctor, the seized clothes were not sent for examination the victim’s two children Were old enough to give evidence in support of the prosecution case, but were not cited in the charge-sheet nor produced as witnesses, Appellate division held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond all reasonable doubt, and the

accused is entitled to get benefit of doubt(Criminal).

Amzed Hossain Vs. The State 9 ALR (2017)(I)—AD-216

 section 6(2)

Commute the death sentence to imprisonment for life

Held; the petitioner has no significant history of prior criminal activity and that he was aged 14 years at the time of commission of the offence and 16 years at the time of framing of charge. The petitioner has been in the condemn cell since 12.07.2001, that is, more than 14 years. Considering all aspects of the case, we are of the view that the death sentence of the petitioner be commuted to imprisonment for life.

BLAST & Anr Vs. Govt. of Bangladesh (Civil) 24 BLT (2016)-AD-10.

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain,1995

Section 6(2)—Since Ain’1995 by its section 6(2) has made these two offences punishable with one sentence of death and since this Ain of 1995, has been given overriding effect these two offences i.e. commission of rape and thereafter causing death of the victim of rape cannot be said “two distinct and separate offences”.

Syed Squad Mainuddin Hasan g Hasan vs State (Criminal)

70 DLR (2018)-AD-70

Mari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishes Bidhan) Ain,1995

Section 6(4) read with Code of Criminal Procedure [V of 898]

section 6(4) and 364-Confessional statement, of accused relating to admission of his guilt for commission of rape and murder when found to be voluntary and true the same can well be the basis of conviction, because truth is the essence of evidence.

The State Vs. Haris (Criminal),

12 ALR (2018)(1)-AD-44.

170  some Importiint Criminal Laws

From the oral evidence and from the facts and circumstances. it is quite clear that the informant was raped on the night of occurrence by accused appellants. Though on medical examination of the victim no sign a rape was found and though no mark of violence was noticed on the body of the victim,inview of the entire evidence on record it appears that the victim was raped by the appellant. So, the learned Judge committed no illegality in convicting the appellant as1995.

under sction 6(3) of Nari-O-Shisu Nirjatan (Bishes Bidhan) Ain,1995.

Badal and another Vs The State, 19 IUD (PIM      527.

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishes Bidhan) Ain, 1995

Sections 6(1), 9(kha) and 9(Ga)—Without appreciating the narajee petition and without any speaking order accepted the Police report by the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman Bishes Adalat cannot be sustained.

The High Court Division observed that the informant categorically narrated the manner of occurrence as well-as the manner of committing rape by the accused and the Police during investigation in its report merely stated that there is no eye witness to the occurrence. But the informant in his narajee petition categorically stated that the Police without visiting the place of occurrence without examining the eye witnesses most illegally submitted a perfunctory final  report.

Md. Lutfor Rahman Vs.Md. Musharraf  Hossain (Criminal).

8 ALR(2016)(2-HCD)-49

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan Daman (Bihesh Bidhan) Ain, 1995

Section 6(4): Death sentence for rape and murder: Extenuating circumstances of 27 years young man and long time detention cannot he a ground for remitting death sentence:

Mr. Khorshed Alam Khan, the learned Advocate for the accused-appellants has made submissions to the effect also that the condemned accused-appellant is a young

man of 27 years only and he is being detained in considering this fact as an extenuating circumstances his death sentence may be now commuted to imprisonment of life for the ends of justice. But consideritua the very nature of the offence which is heinous, ghastly arid barbaric act of rape and murde committed upon a 16 years old girl we are of the opinion that justice will be denied if the death .sentence of the accused Appellant Rakibor Okibor is commuted to imprisonment for life. law has provided death sentence for some offences (Para14).

Rokibur Vs State

4 CLR (2016)-AD-123

Some Important triminal law 171

Whim) Ain,1995

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishes Bidhan)Ain,1995 (Section 8( 1)

Morality cannot be legislated but behaviour can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not mctrality cannot he legislated, the heart, but they can restrain the heartless. The Appellate Division observed that the change h Court Division noticed that P.W.6 Abdul Baset is not the full brother of P.W.2, Nazma and that PW7 Asia Begum is not the mother of the victim; rather P.W.7 is the step mother of the victim. With reference to the affidavit filed by the petitioners, the High Court Division found that the petitioners Tried to impress upon that the victim of her own volition went to the brothel but that the said affidavit was neither properly exhibited nor was it filed in the trial Court and that the victim denied making any affidavit. The High Court Division having considered the evidence of doctor, P.W.9 and the medical report, exhibit-1 found that the age of the victim was about 17 years on the date of her examination and that the victim in her evidence claimed that she was about 13 or 14 years old. The finding of the doctor as to age is belied by the fact that his report shows the taking place of menarche one year back. In context of development of girls in Bangladesh the age stated by the victim would be more commensurate with menarche having started one year previously. The accused-petitioners having no morality could dare to sell the Victim PW2 Nazma to a brothel. They were convicted under section 8(1) of the Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain,1995 and sentenced them to suffer imprisonment for life. The order of conviction and sentence was rightly affirmed by the High Court Division. Accordingly, criminal petition for leave to appeal is dismissed.

Sukur Mahmood Vs. The State (Syed Mohmud Hossain J,)

8 ALR 2016(2)-AD-141.

Nari-O-Shishu Nirjatan (Bishesh Bidhan) Ain (XVIII of 1995)

Sections 9(1)(4) (kha)—Medical report is very much consistent with an attempt of rape by the accused  upon the victim and if we consider the whole evidence altogether we find that the accused should have been convicted and sentenced under section 9(4)(Kha) of the Ain for taking attempt to commit rape on the victim. The accused should have been convicted under sections 9 (4)kha) of the Ain for taking an attempt to commit rape on the victim at the time of occurrence instead of conviction under section 9(1) of the Ain.

Tobarak Hossain vs State (Criminal) 25 .BLC (2020)-HCD-233

Section-9(Kha) and 14 For bringing accusation of kidnapping a woman for accomplishment of one of the purpose mentioned in section 9 of the Act or to put a person on trial to answer the accusation of kidnapping a woman for one of the purposes mentioned in the section there must be kidnapping a woman for one of the purposes or in other words   lioro. must bemg   kidnapppping with a mind accomplish one of the purposes mentioned in the section

Leave a Reply

     More News Of This Category