8 Nov 2012: Tribunal orders on Molla

Following previous hearing on Mollah, the tribunal passed two orders relating to him - one regarding privileged communication in jail. Another relating to hospitalization. They are set out below

This is an application filed by accused Abdul Kader Molla praying for direction upon the Jail Authority to allow privileged communication between the accused petitioner and the defence counsel in the jail. Defence counsel has filed another application seeking direction to Jail Authority for serving a set of certified copies of the depositions of witnesses to the accused in the jail. Mr Fariduddin Khan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused petitioner submits that the engaged counsel Md. Abdus Sobhan Tarofdar could not consult with the accused for taking preparation of the defence case as such he prays for allowing the defence counsels to have privileged communication with the accused in the jail and also giving permission to handover certified copies of depositions of witnesses to the accused in the jail. Mr. Mohammad Ali, the leamed prosecutor did not oppose applications for privileged communication and handing over copies depositions of the witnesses to the accused. Upon consideration of the facts, and on perusal of the petition, we are Inclined to allow the prayer in accordance with jail code on condition that 2(two) counsels namely Mr. Md. Abdus Sobhan Tarofdar and Mr. Sazzad ALi Chowdhury be allowed to meet and have discussion with the accused-petitioner Abdul Kader Molla in the jail. The prayer for serving copies of depositions of witnesses to the accused is allowed. Let the Jaii Authority be directed to allow the privileged communication of the accused petitioner with his two learned counsel named above on 10.11.2012 from 9.30 a.m. to 12.30 p.m. and they will be allowed to consult with the accused petitioner during office hour and this communication of them will be a privileged communication that means nobody will be allowed to be present at the time of communication except the security personel who will be allowed to see communication but not to hear the consultations. With this, the petition is allowed. Jail Authority is also directed to allow the counsel of the defence to hand over copies of depositions of witnesses to the accused in the jail. Let a copy of the order be communicated to the prison authority for information, necessary action, and guidance. 

The second order:

This is an application filed on behalf of the accused Abdul Kader Molla seeking direction to the prison authority for hospitalization of the accused, on the ground stated therein. Mr Abdur Razzak, the learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the accused petitioner submits that the accused has been suffering from cardiac problem and the doctor concerned advised him to hospitalized and as such he prays for passing an order so that he can undergo necessary treatment in a specialized hospital. Mr Mohamrnad Ali, the learned prosecutor opposed the application by submitting that the jail authority is the proper authority to determine what type of treatment is to be provided to the accused petitioner in accordance with Jail Code. It appears that already, by our earlier orders, we have directed the prison authority for arranging the treatment of the accused in Ibrahim cardiac Hospital, if considered necessary at his own cost. It is, in fact, the prison authority who is supposed to make the need assessment according to the Jail Code fbr the purpose of providing medical treatment to the accused detained in Jail and decide whether he needs to be hospitalized. However, the prison authority can best consider the necessitv for hospitalizing the accused, if needed. With the above observations the application is disposed of. Let a copy of the order be communicated to the prison authority for information and necessary action, if any.