Dhaka, May 9 – Amid commotion and disturbance in the courtroom, the Appellate Division Wednesday concluded hearing on the two appeals of the government and the Anti-Corruption Commission, challenging the High Court bail order granted to BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia in Zia Orphanage Trust graft case. After concluding hearing from the parties, the four-member bench of the Appellate Division headed by chief justice Syed Mahmud Hossain fixed May 15 for delivering its order regarding the bail of BNP chief Khaleda Zia, who is now serving a five-year term in jail in connection with the graft case.
During yesterday’s hearing, a section of lawyers created chaotic situation inside the courtroom while attorney general was placing arguments opposing the BNP chief’s bail. Even, chief justice wanted to leave the courtroom at one stage of commotion and disturbance created inside the courtroom by the lawyers.
However, the situation became calm following the interference of the senior lawyers and the judges of the Appellate Division.
The ACC lawyers even the state could not reply properly to the some queries of the court, which were raised by the BNP lawyers during the hearing.
BNP lawyers challenged to the court saying that there was no single instance that the Appellate Division had interfered with the bail order delivered by the High Court. Rather, there was many instances that the Appellate Division has been granting bail to the accused if the High Court did not grant them bail.
The judges of the Appellate Division asked the ACC lawyer and the Attorney General to give the reply of the BNP lawyers’ points and give at least one example regarding the matter. But, neither the ACC lawyer nor the state lawyer did not able to give a proper reply to the court query on this point.
During the day’s proceedings, Advocate AJ Mohammad Ali, one of the counsel for the BNP chief, in a jam-packed courtroom started placing his arguments before the court at 9.20am.
Referring cases of—-BNP leader Moshiur Rahman and health minister Mohammad Nasim—-, Ali told the court that the High Court granted bail for them although the lower court convicted them in connection with two graft cases filed by the ACC. The Appellate Division has also upheld the HC order regarding their bail.
Not only two cases, if the High Court granted bail, the Appellate Division never interfere with the High Court in 99.99 per cent cases regarding the bail order. So, a difference cannot be made relating to the Khaleda Zia’s case, Ali noted.
The government is trying to dispose of this case within a short time with a malafide intention, which is politically motivated. There is a common assumption among the lawyers that the bail order is depending on special clearance, he added.
Then, chief justice (CJ) said that there is no benefit by saying this. Attorney General (AG) Mahbubey Alam stood and said that Ali’s statement is not true. “Why you are talking as I am speaking,” CJ told the AG.
Ali said that the government has kept Khaleda Zia in an abandoned jail and it wanted to dispose of the case proceedings quickly, which is not acceptable.
The High Court granted her bail properly considering her old age, health condition and a short period of sentence. The High Court order should uphold to ensure justice and keeping the image and dignity of the judiciary. It will not be wise to interfere with the High Court order relating to the bail of BNP chief, he added.
The lower court in its judgement said that the offence committed by Khaleda Zia was a financial crime. If it was a financial offence, then the trial should have been under the proper law. There is no scope to conduct the trial proceedings against her under section 409 of the Criminal Procedure of Code (CrPC). But, it is proved in the judgment that the lower has intentionally punished the BNP chief under the CrPC, Ali noted.
Advocate Khandaker Mahbub Hossain, another counsel for Khaleda Zia, told the court that the state side could not give any example of a case that the Appellate Division interfered regarding the High Court bail order.
The government has taken minus one theory and it wanted to minus BNP chairperson Khaleda Zia by giving allegations on the court, Hossain added.
Referring the pending cases before the court, Hossain said that more than 33 lakh cases were pending before the courts for disposal across the country. Among these, more than 4 lakh cases pending before the HC while 16 cases pending before the Appellate Division for disposal. Why the AG wanted to hold the quick hearing on BNP chairperson case skipping those pending cases, Hossain asked the AG.
Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) president Zainul Abedin told the court that the state or the ACC did not file an appeal against the High Court order that cancelled the case filed against Sheikh Hasina. But, the state and the ACC filed appeals in the case of Khaleda Zia with an ill-motive, he added.
Khaleda Zia’s health condition is deteriorated, if the Appellate Division granted bail for her, she might not fall in sick. The court is for the people and people is not for the court. So, everything has to be examined by the court. The court should uphold its dignity and image. The court should not support the autocratic rule of the government, Zainul said.
Then, the CJ said that you would also do it if you will go in power.
Taking part in the hearing, Barrister Moudud Ahmed said that the lower court did not specify the abettor and the principal accused in its judgment.
“If Khaleda Zia would have not engaged in politics, the matter is not come in the court. You (judges) are reading newspapers that what is going on in the country. We are the victim at this time and we are a third class citizen of the country. The cases have been filed against us although we were not involved in any offences,” he noted.
The government came before the court only to eradicate the opposite party from the country. The BNP chief was not involved with the allegations of misappropriating money. The allegations have brought against her for 2 crore of money. She was not dealing with the money during her regime. Crores of money have been embezzled at this time from the country. But, the government brought allegations against Khaleda Zia only for two crore, which is ill-motivated politically, Moudud added.
A lawyer have been died earlier after not getting bail from the apex court. If anything happen to the BNP chief, the government would give the responsibility to the court for the incident. The government will tell that she is well. But, the court should look after the real matter, Moudud noted.
ACC lawyer Khurshid Alam Khan told the court that the case of Moshiur Rahman and the BNP chief case not same. The Appellate Division did not give any reason over the Moshiur Rahman case.
In replying to a court query, the ACC lawyer did not give any reply. Then, a section of lawyers shouted from the behind of the courtroom.
The court said that it cannot run the court, if the lawyers would become agitated.
AG Mahbubey Alam told the court that there was a huge gap between the Moshiur Rahman and the Khaleda Zia case. The state money has stolen in the case.
Then, the pro-BNP lawyers shouted loudly in the courtroom. SCBA president Zainul Abedin and its secretary Mahbub Uddin Khokan stood and opposed the AG statement and the lawyers shouted saying Dalal Dalal, which created a chaotic situation in the courtroom.
The chief justice attempted to leave the courtroom at that time. But, after getting assurance from senior lawyers he did not leave the courtroom.
The CJ asked the AG not to be agitated and submit his argument.
The AG said that how can he submit the argument amid the situation.
Later, he submitted his argument praying to the court for not granting bail to the BNP chief saying that the BNP chief has been ill since long and she has been doing politics with the illness since long. So, the court cannot grant her bail on medical ground. After that, the court fixed May 15 for delivering its order on the bail of BNP chief. – Staff Reporter
