[ad_1]
Faridpur-4 MP Mujibur Rahman Chowdhury Nixon’s advance bail has been confirmed by the Appellate Division Chamber Court in the Election Commission case. The State party requested the Appeals Division to suspend the six-week advance bond granted by the Superior Court. Following the appeal hearing, Judge Muhammad Nuruzzaman of the Appeals Chamber confirmed the bail granted by the High Court.
Top advocates for Abdul Based Majumder and Saeed Ahmed Raja appeared for Nixon Chowdhury and Deputy Attorney General Saiful Islam appeared for the state.
Earlier on Tuesday (October 20), Nixon Chowdhury appeared in Superior Court seeking advance bond. With the hearing of both parties, Judge Sheikh Mohammad. A High Court divisional court consisting of Judge Zakir Hossain and Judge KM Zahid Sarwar granted an eight-week advance bond.
The court order said that Nixon Chowdhury was a member of Parliament. We consider that the statement of your lawyer in favor of the bail request is taken into account. For this reason, if you are granted a conditional bond for a limited time, it will be fair.
Meanwhile, after the court order, Nixon Chowdhury said: ‘I respect the law. It is a case of violation of the electoral code of conduct. The court granted me an advance bond in that case. He said: ‘I have repeatedly said that as much as is said in the recording of my telephone conversation, it is with the Deputy Commissioner of Faridpur (DC). But I am raising the question of how it came about through social media and should it be judged. He (DC) has to tell how it happened on social media. This is also a legal offense. The government will take action against him, I hope so and the people are doing it. When the deputy commissioner gives it to the government, there will be an investigation, then there will be evidence.
He said: ‘Inshallah, I will take up the case against me in court. And I have said it from the beginning, it is a false thing, it has been done by editing. ‘
The elections for Charbhadrasan Upazila Parishad were held on October 10. Faridpur’s Senior Elections Officer Nawabul Islam filed a case against Faridpur-4 (Bhanga-Sadarpur-Charbhadrasan) constituency deputy Mujibur Rahman Chowdhury Nixon on October 15 alleging violation of the code of conduct. After the case was shelved, MP Nixon Chowdhury’s leaders and activists staged demonstrations at the three upazilas calling it fake and fabricated. Also, the human chain of students has been carried out in front of two educational institutions in Dhaka. The EC has demanded the immediate withdrawal of the case brought against Nixon Chowdhury from all these meetings and demonstrations.
Nixon Chowdhury applied for advance bond in the EC case in Superior Court last Sunday. The court set a date for the hearing on Tuesday. Consequently, the independent deputy appeared in the High Court in the morning. Hundreds of leaders and activists from his constituency appeared. The hearing on the request for bail began at 1.30 p.m. Nixon Chowdhury was present in court at the time.
Your attorney at the bond hearing. Shahdin Malik said that article 43 of the constitution guarantees the privacy of letters and communications of all citizens. The Telecommunications Regulation Act of 2001 states that the government can order the telephone company to record (a person’s conversation) in the interest of national security and public order. In that case, the search warrant will be by order of the Minister of the Interior or the Minister of State. But no such order was made in the case of Nixon Chowdhury’s phone record. Therefore, it is a violation of the constitution to illegally record your phone conversation and make it viral on social media. The EC has filed a case against him with the viral audio record. For this reason, the case is questionable. He said that a recent judgment by a double tribunal of the Superior Court had observed the leakage of citizens’ telephone conversations. The ruling said that the constitution guarantees the protection of the privacy of citizens. This constitutional right of the citizen cannot be violated if he so wishes. In light of that verdict, this leaked audio recording is a violation of the constitution and the verdict.
He said that the bail applicant had been accused of violating the code of conduct by holding post-election rallies. But there is no other name in the case statement except Nixon Chowdhury. Neither is anonymity. Because it is never possible for one person to hold a meeting alone.
Opposing bail, Deputy Attorney General Jannatul Ferdousi Rupa said that a member of parliament had broken the law by holding processions and clashes after the elections. This has violated the oath. At this stage, the court said, is it possible for a person to carry out a procession-confrontation? The DAG said no one, there were many more. The court said one person has been charged in the statement and there is no anonymity. So how did a person make a confrontation in procession?
In response to opposition to bail. Shahdin Malik said that the Members of Parliament Dispute Determination Act of 1980 stated that the Speaker of the National Assembly had the power to see if a Member of Parliament violated the oath. No officer in charge (OC) of any police station is responsible for this. During the hearing. Lawyer Manzur Alam assisted Shahdin Malik. After granting bail in advance after the hearing, the High Court also asked them to cooperate in the investigation of the case and not influence the witnesses.
Ittefaq / RA
[ad_2]
