IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH

HIGH COURT DIVISION

(SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)

WRIT PETITION NO. 6234 OF 2024

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO. 6083 OF 2024.

IN THE MATTER OF :

An application under Article 102 of the Constitution of People’s Republic of Bangladesh.

And

IN THE MATTER OF :

Mujibur Rahman and others

.............Petitioners in WP No. 6234 of 2024 Jewel Khan and others

.............Petitioners in WP No. 6083 of 2024

-VS-

Judge, Artha Rin Adalat, Chattogram and others

.............Respondents in both writ petitions

Mr. Mustafizur Rahman Khan, Senior Advocate with

Mr. Mohammad Masud Mia, Advocate

...for the petitioners in WP No. 6083 of 2024

Mr. Probir Neogi, Senior Advocate with

Mr. Muntasir Uddin Ahmed, Advocate

...for the petitioners in WP No. 6234 of 2024

Mr. Shah Monjurul Hoque, Senior Advocate with Mr. Muhammad Harunur Rashid, Advocate

..... for the respondent No. 4 in WP No. 6083 of 2024.

Present :

Mr. Justice Zafar Ahmed

And

Mr. Justice Sardar Md. Rashed Jahangir

The 16th July, 2024 Reference under Rule 1C of Chapter II of the Supreme Court of Bangladesh (High Court Division) Rules, 1973 for constitution of a Special Bench.

Both the Rules involve a common question of law. This Bench decided to hear the Rules together.

In Writ Petition (WP) No. 6234 of 2024, Rule Nisi was issued on 02.06.2024 calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why order No. 08 dated 12.05.2024 passed by the respondent No. 1 Artha Rin Adalat, Chattogram in Artha Rin Suit No. 652 of 2023 imposing restriction upon the petitioners from travelling abroad and further, communication of the same to the Special Police Super (Immigration), Special Police, respondent No. 2 as contained in Annexure-B should not be declared to have been passed without lawful authority and is of no legal effect and as to why an order should not be passed upon the respondents to refrain them from harassing the petitioners from travelling abroad and return.

In WP No. 6083 of 2024, Rule Nisi was issued on 20.05.2024 calling upon the respondents to show cause as to why order No. 6 dated 27.02.2024 (Annexure-E) passed by the Artha Rin Adalat, Chattogram (respondent No. 2) in Artha Rin Suit No. 568 of 2023 restraining the defendant-petitioners from travelling abroad without permission of the Court and also directing the petitioner Nos. 1 and 4 (defendant Nos. 2 and 5) to surrender their passport to the Court should not be declared to have been passed without any lawful authority and is of no legal effect.

The common question of law is whether the Artha Rin Adalat can impose an embargo upon the defendant(s) from travelling abroad in exercise of its inherent power under Section 57 of the Artha Rin Adalat Ain, 2003 (in short, the ‘Ain’). In both Artha Rin cases, the concerned Artha Rin Adalat passed the travel restriction order before final disposal of the respective cases.

Mr. Mustafizur Rahman Khan, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners of WP No. 6083 of 2024 submits that by virtue of Section 6(1) of the Ain, 2003, the relevant provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) apply to the proceedings of Artha Rin Suit subject to the condition that those provisions of the CPC are not inconsistent with those of the Ain. He draws our attention to Order XXXVIII rules 1-4 of the CPC, which deal with matters relating to arrest before judgment, and submits that in order to give effect to the relevant provisions of the CPC, in particular, execution of warrant to arrest contained in rule 1, the Adalat can pass travel restriction order in exercise of its inherent power under Section 57 of the Ain, 2003 which allows the Adalat to pass supplementary order (f¢lf§lL B­cn) required for the ends of justice intended under the Ain or to prevent misuse of the Court proceedings.

Mr. Probir Neogi, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioners of WP No. 6234 of 2024, on the other hand, refers to Article