The chief justice today sent two writ petitions challenging the appointment of a trial court judge, who indicted BNP Chairperson Khaleda Zia in two corruption cases, to a High Court bench.
The move follows dissenting orders on the petitions by another division bench of the higher court.
After receiving the petition, the bench of Justice Quazi Reza-Ul Hoque fixed tomorrow to hold a hearing on the petitions.
Earlier on May 25, Justice Farah Mahbub, senior judge of the bench, stayed the proceedings of both the cases -- Zia Orphanage Trust and Zia Charitable Trust corruption cases -- for three months.
However, Justice Kazi Md Ejarul Haque Akondo, the other judge of the bench, summarily rejected the prayers, saying there was no substance in the petitions.
Following the spilt orders the HC bench sent the petitions and the orders to Chief Justice Md Mozammel Hossain who forwarded those to the bench of Justice Hoque for their disposal.
On March 19, Bashudev Roy, judge of Special Judge's Court-3 of Dhaka, framed charges against Khaleda and eight others in the corruption cases, filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).
Khaleda filed two writs with the HC on May 12 challenging the appointment of the judge and her indictment. She also prayed for scrapping the proceedings of the cases.
During the May 25 hearing, Justice Farah also issued a rule asking the government to explain in four weeks why the gazette notification published without fixing the jurisdiction of the special court should not be declared illegal.
The government issued the notification on April 25, 2007 under Section 4(1) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1958. Bashudev Roy was appointed as the judge of court on March 4 this year.
Justice Farah also asked the government to explain why the continuation of the proceedings against Khaleda and her indictment should not be declared illegal.
Earlier on April 23, the HC rejected two review petitions of Khaleda, challenging the indictment orders issued by Bashudev Roy in the same cases.
The HC in its order said the trial court had properly framed charges against her in the cases.