Mobile court law contrary to CrPC sections, says CJ

Chief Justice (CJ) Surendra Kumar Sinha yesterday said the Mobile Court Act contradicts  some sections of the Criminal Procedure of Code (CrPC). “We will give you a chart demonstrating the sections of the Act that are contrary to the CrPC,” the CJ told attorney general Mahbubey Alam.

Sinha, who presided over a six-member Appellate Division bench, made the observation after Alam sought an adjournment of the hearing on the government’s petition against a High Court (HC) ban on mobile courts.

When the CJ asked the AG why he was seeking time, the latter replied that they needed time for holding hearing on the appeal.

To this, the CJ said: “It would be better for your government to hold the hearing quickly. We will complete the trial proceedings in accordance with the law. We will not do anything that goes against the law.”

Alam also told the bench that there was need to operate mobile courts to stop different crimes, including catching of fish by the banned current net. “My home is on the river bank of Padma. I see that current nets are still being used to catch fish,” he said.

The CJ replied that the court had declared fishing by current nets illegal. “But what will we do if the law enforcement agencies are not vigilant enough?” he added.

Later, the Appellate Division bench granted another extension to the stay order on the HC ban till October 10.

Earlier, the apex court had extended its stay order on the HC ban on several occasions following the government’s time petition.

In another development, the same Appellate Division bench directed the government to form an expert committee, led by a Dhaka University food and nutrition professor, to examine food supplement spirulina, which was imported by Jesan Group Pvt Limited from Malaysia in 2015.

It said the expert body must submit its probe report within two weeks.

The bench passed the order while hearing a government appeal against an HC order that directed the government to release 733,980 pieces of imported spirulina. An anti-narcotics mobile court had seized the spirulina pieces on February 4, 2016, saying that it was a drug, but the Jesan Group had imported it as food supplement.

The mobile court had also fined the company Tk. 2 lakh and later jailed its managing director, Faisal Bin Ilias, for three months for defaulting on paying the fine.

 

Mobile court law contrary to CrPC sections, says CJ

Chief Justice (CJ) Surendra Kumar Sinha yesterday said the Mobile Court Act contradicts some sections of the Criminal Procedure of Code (CrPC). We will give you a chart demonstrating the sections of the Act that are contrary to the CrPC, the CJ told attorney general Mahbubey Alam. Sinha, who presided over a six-member Appellate Division bench, made the observation after Alam sought an adjournment of the hearing on the governments petition against a High Court (HC) ban on mobile courts. When the CJ asked the AG why he was seeking time, the latter replied that they needed time for holding hearing on the appeal. To this, the CJ said: It would be better for your government to hold the hearing quickly. We will complete the trial proceedings in accordance with the law. We will not do anything that goes against the law. Alam also told the bench that there was need to operate mobile courts to stop different crimes, including catching of fish by the banned current net. My home is on the river bank of Padma. I see that current nets are still being used to catch fish, he said. The CJ replied that the court had declared fishing by current nets illegal. But what will we do if the law enforcement agencies are not vigilant enough? he added. Later, the Appellate Division bench granted another extension to the stay order on the HC ban till October 10. Earlier, the apex court had extended its stay order on the HC ban on several occasions following the governments time petition. In another development, the same Appellate Division bench directed the government to form an expert committee, led by a Dhaka University food and nutrition professor, to examine food supplement spirulina, which was imported by Jesan Group Pvt Limited from Malaysia in 2015. It said the expert body must submit its probe report within two weeks. The bench passed the order while hearing a government appeal against an HC order that directed the government to release 733,980 pieces of imported spirulina. An anti-narcotics mobile court had seized the spirulina pieces on February 4, 2016, saying that it was a drug, but the Jesan Group had imported it as food supplement. The mobile court had also fined the company Tk. 2 lakh and later jailed its managing director, Faisal Bin Ilias, for three months for defaulting on paying the fine.