The New Nation - Internet Edition

Staff Reporter

A High Court Division Bench yesterday stayed the proceedings of Tk 3 crore extortion case against former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina until the High Court disposes of its rule.

The Bench comprising Justice ABM Khairul Haque and Justice Abdul Awal also issued a Rule upon the Government to explain why the impugned government notification directing the Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Judge to hold its sitting for trial of Sheikh Hasina's case at a makeshift court should not be declared to have been made "without lawful authority".

"The stay will continue until the rule is resolved," says the High Court order that was passed minutes after the trial court held back for three days the charge framing hearing of extortion charge against detained ex-premier Sheikh Hasina.

When the makeshift Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Judge's Court, located on the premises of Parliament complex, resumed yesterday after a five-day adjournment, Judge M Azizul Haque re-fixed December 13 for the charge framing hearings following a medical report submitted by the jail authority.

According to the report, Sheikh Hasina is suffering from fever and headache along with eye pain. "She is unfit to appear in the Court," the report said.

Also came soon a High Court order altogether staying the trial proceedings of the Tk 3-crore extortion case filed by Azam J Chowdhury, Managing Director of East Coast Trading Private Ltd, a power company.

The High Court rule came upon a writ petition filed by Sheikh Hasina, who is the President of Awami League (AL), as the defense side put up a two-pronged legal battle against her arrest and trial.

In exercise of its power under section 9(2) of the CrPC, the Caretaker Government on November 26 published a gazette notification directing the Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Judge to sit at the Jatiya Sangsad bhaban Minister's hostel to try Sheikh Hasina, her younger sister Sheikh Rehana and cousin and former Minister Sheikh Fazlul Karim Selim in the extortion case.

Sheikh Hasina, in her writ petition challenging the legality of the government action, submitted that the executive branch has no more such authority to shift court after the Separation of the Judiciary from the Executive control in compliance with the landmark judgment in the Masdar Hossain case.

"Even the Sessions Court cannot assume jurisdiction in law to try the specific case in a place other than its usual place of holding court, without sanction of the law and approval by the Supreme Court," Sheikh Hasina contended.

She further submitted that section 9(2) of the CrPC could not be invoked for shifting a sessions' division to a place other than the usual place of sitting for the purposes of trial of one specific case.

"It does not empower the government to transfer the sessions court from one place to another for one particular case at their sweet will, as has been done against me," she said in her writ petition.

Sheikh Hasina alleged that the Government acted with a "mala fide and ulterior motive to create a coercive courtroom environment, which is not conducive to a free, fair and impartial trial, which is the requirement of law and the petitioner".

Following the separation of the judiciary from the executive, Sheikh Hasina argued, the Government "of its own motion cannot act in matters pertaining to the judiciary, save-and-except by the Supreme Court".

"The action of the Government to try a particular case is a colourable exercise of power and a direct interference in the administration of justice and, therefore, the action of the Government is not tenable in law and liable to be declared to have been made illegally," she submitted further.

The High Court Division Bench comprising Justice ABM Khairul Haque and Justice Abdul Awal issued the stay order and the rule after hearing of the writ petition.

Barrister Rafique-ul Huq, assisted by Barrister Shafique Ahmed, appeared in the Court for Sheikh Hasina.