[ad_1]
A virtual appeals court of seven judges headed by the Chief Justice ruled the defendant’s appeal on Tuesday, alleging that the life sentence was “inconsistent” with the Appellate Division’s verdict.
The petition was settled by a majority, Supreme Court Chief Justice Syed Mahmud Hossain said in summary judgment.
In the initial sense, life imprisonment means that the convicted person will spend the rest of his normal life in prison.
If articles 45 and 53 of the Penal Code are combined with articles 55, 56 of the Penal Code and article 35 a) of the Penal Procedure Code, life imprisonment is reduced to 30 years in prison.
However, when a court, tribunal or tribunal constituted under the International Criminal Court Act 1973 sentences a convicted person to death, it will not benefit from article 35 (a) of the Code of Procedure.
Lawyer Khandaker Mahbub Hossain and Lawyer Shishir Monir were present in court on behalf of the defendants. Attorney General AM Amin Uddin represented the state.
After the verdict, Attorney General AM Amin Uddin told reporters: “Life imprisonment means that the accused must be sentenced to a maximum of 30 years. However, the Appeals Division has issued a review verdict stating that if the court passes the death sentence, then it should be considered.
The attorney general also clarified that the 30-year rule will not apply to convicted persons in International Criminal Court cases.
The defendant’s lawyer, Khandaker Mahbub Hossain, said: “There was a dilemma as to how much life meant, how long the defendant should be sentenced. We said in a petition for review that according to the provisions of current law, life imprisonment will be 30 years. Because if it is not 30 years, then all the provisions of other prison laws and codes will be repealed, including 35 (a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
“In today’s sentencing, the Appeals Division has said that life is as long as a person’s normal life. But according to the law, a person sentenced to life imprisonment must serve 30 years. If the court or tribunal gives an order special, then death will be in jail. ”
In response to a question, Khandaker Mahbub said: “We are quite satisfied with the verdict. However, the death penalty is inhumane and if there is a death penalty, aging must be done in the district. When a person gets old, they will not have the strength to move. The court will then have to consider the issue of your care.
“I still think that when it comes to the death penalty, there will be a court order when there will be probation. When a sick person gets old, he cannot move, the government can release him according to the current provisions. But after the verdict, when the death penalty is imposed, the government will not have that power (power to parole). So we can request a second reconsideration if necessary. “
Life imprisonment means death penalty, verdict
The president of the Supreme Court explained the sentence of life imprisonment
Life imprisonment for two defendants means the death penalty
A full appeals bank headed by the Chief Justice had awaited the verdict (CAV) of the petition for review after a hearing on July 11 last year.
At the review hearing, the Supreme Court heard the statements of five amicus curiae. They are the lawyers Rokon Uddin Mahmud, AF Hasan Arif, Abdur Rezak Khan, Munsurul Haque Chowdhury and AM Amin Uddin.
The defendants filed the review in 2016, claiming that the appeals division’s verdict, which said life in prison means the death penalty, was “inconsistent.”
Khandaker Mahbub Hossain, then chairman of the Supreme Court Bar Association, said the final judgment verdict in a murder case (in February of that year) was in conflict with a previous ruling by the Appeals Division.
He told a press conference in the auditorium of the Supreme Court Bar Association that day that the verdict had created “uncertainty” about the interpretation of the law. That verdict was not given “with due consideration.” A review has been requested to clear up the confusion.
A four-judge appeals court headed by Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha approved the verdict after hearing appeals from two defendants in the 2001 Savar murder of businessman Zaman. The full verdict was posted on the Supreme Court website on April 24, 2016.
He said that according to articles 53 and 45 of the Penal Code, life imprisonment would be life imprisonment. As a result, all those sentenced to life imprisonment must be executed.
Khandaker Mahbub Hossain told a news conference the same day that he had requested reconsideration of the Appeals Division’s verdict. According to current criminal law and prison rules, life imprisonment means 30 years in prison. After that, if the defendant gets a discount, the time of that punishment will be further shortened.
In accordance with article 35 a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the period of detention during the judicial period will also be deducted from the sentence.
Khandaker Mahbub added that the Appeals Division, headed by Judge Nazmun Ara Sultana, had ruled in 2013 that life imprisonment meant 22 and a half years in prison.
While the Appellate Division ruling and the law were in effect, there was another Appeals Division ruling led by Judge Sinha; There, life imprisonment means “death penalty.”
“This verdict has been issued without revoking the previous verdict of the Appeals Division. As a result, there has been confusion about the interpretation of the verdict. In addition, it is not appropriate to suspend the validity of article 35 a) of the Criminal Procedure Code in the case of a life sentence. He needs to be eliminated, “said Khandaker Mahbub Hossain.
The appeal verdict in the Zaman murder case said that a person sentenced to life imprisonment has no right to be pardoned. A person sentenced to life imprisonment cannot claim any other benefit (discount).
Highlighting the inconsistencies in the current context of British-era laws and regulations, Judge SK Sinha spoke of “confusion” about life imprisonment in various out-of-court events.
He said at a function in Gazipur on June 26, 2016, “You think 30 years is a defendant sentenced to life in prison. Assume, everywhere. In fact, it is being misunderstood. All life absolutely means life, the rest of life. “
He later expressed the same opinion in the court verdict. In his explanation the day after the verdict was announced, then-Attorney General Mahbubey Alam said that only those who would be sentenced to life in prison on appeal would be sentenced to death. And those who will be sentenced to life in prison in various cases will not have to remain in jail until death. According to the penal code, they will be released after serving 30 years in prison.
[ad_2]
