IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BANGLADESH

HIGH COURT DIVISION

(CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION) Present:

Mr. Justice Md. Shohrowardi

Criminal Appeal No.5000 of 2023 Mostofa Mohsin

…….Appellant -versus-

The state and another

…….Respondents

Mr. Azizur Rahman Dulu, Advocate

…. For the appellant

Mr. A.K.M. Fazlul Haque , Advocate

……For the respondent No. 2 ACC

Mr. S.M. Golam Mostofa, DAG with

Mr. Md. A. Mannan, AAG

….For the State in all the appeals. Heard on18.02.2024, 19.02.2024, 04.03.2024, 05.03.2024, 21.04.2024 and 23.04.2024.

Judgment delivered on 24.04.2024.

This appeal under section 10 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958 is directed challenging the legality and propriety of the impugned judgment and order dated 31.03.2022 passed by Special Judge, Court No. 10, Dhaka in Special Case No. 2 of 2020 convicting the appellant under section 420 of the Penal Code, 1860 and sentencing him thereunder to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 07 (seven) years and to pay a fine of Tk. 3,00,00,000 (three crore), in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1(one) year.

The prosecution case in short is that plot No. 1 measuring an area of approximately 280 square yards located at Road No. 14, Sector-5, Uttara Model Town, Dhaka was allotted to Md. Mujibur Rahman, Assistant Engineer, DIT and accordingly the Lease Deed No. 6592 of 1980 was executed and registered. The accused Mostofa Mohsin is the son of the said lessee Md. Mujibur Rahman. Subsequently, the said plot was renumbered as plot No. 1, Road No. 9C, Sector-5, Uttara, Dhaka due to change in the layout plan. The lessee Md. Mujibur Rahman sold the said plot at a price of Tk. 215,00,000 to one Kazi Aysha Humayra and received Tk. 2,14,00,000. He executed and registered sale agreement No 17728 of 1992 dated 27.09.1982. After that, the lessee Md. Mujibur Rahman, father of the accused Mostofa Mohsin, died on 16.08.1992. During his lifetime, the lessee Md. Mujibur Rahman and after his death, his heirs did not register the sale deed in favour of the Kazi Aysha Humayra. Thereafter, she filed Title Suit No. 143 of 1996 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Court No. 2, Dhaka against the heirs of late Md. Mujibur Rahman including the accused Mostofa Mohsin and the Chairman of RAJUK was also impleaded as defendant in the said suit. On 03.03.1997 a file was opened in the law section of RAJUK and the learned Advocate Ms. Nilufa Kader was appointed to conduct the case on behalf of the RAJUK. Subsequently, the case was transferred to the Joint District Judge, Court No. 3, Dhaka and the case was renumbered as Title Suit No. 88 of 2006. After concluding the trial, the trial Court by judgment and decree dated 03.07.2006 decreed the suit in favour of the said Kazi Ayesha Humayra and the decreetal Court executed the decree by registering sale deed No. 10937 dated 17.08.2011 in favour of Kazi Ayesha Humayra.

During the pendency of the said suit, the heirs of the late Mujibur Rahman filed applications on 22.11.2001 and 05.01.2006 to the RAJUK for mutating their names in the records of the RAJUK. On 17.05.2006 the file of the RAJUK was sent to the law section and in the absence of the learned Magistrate of RAJUK, co-accused Md. Meraj Ali, a concerned dealing officer of the law section of RAJUK, concealing the information about pendency of the title suit sent the record of the estate section to the learned legal advisor of the RAJUK. After that, learned Legal Advisor had given his opinion on 18.07.2006 and on 02.09.2007 approval was given to mutate the said plot in the name of the heirs of Md. Mujibur Rahman including accused Md. Mostofa Mohsin. Subsequently, permission was given to transfer the plot to Mitol Property Limited. Thereafter the plot was sold to Mitol Property Ltd. Thereby the accused persons committed offence under section 409/420/201/109 of the Penal Code, 1860 read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruptio