Biological differences in human personality also account for criminality in human beings. The logic behinds biological explanation of crime is that structure determines function and persons behave differently owing to the fact that they are somehow structurally different. The physical and biological abnormalities are generally responsible for criminal behaviour. In other words, the criminal is viewed as biological organism characteristically different, abnormal, defective and inferior, both biologicallyand physiologically.The physio-biological explanation of criminal behaviour inspired Pro. Franz Joseph Gale to develop the doctrine of phrenology relationship between head conformation and personal characteristics of a person. He first published his work on this topic in 1791. His disciple John Gapser Spurzheim carried this doctrine to England and United States in early twenties of nineteenth century.An American criminologist Dr.Caldweel showed keen interest in phrenology and published his 'Elements of Phrenology' in 1824. The doctrine underlined three basic propositions :-
i) the exterior of skull conforms to interior, and to the shape of brain;
ii) the mind consists of faculties;
iii) these faculties are related to brain and skull.
Dr.Caldweel emphasized that sentiments control the propensities and are aided by will to govern the whole conduct or act of a person. Thus 'will' and 'spirit' were supreme in controlling the human behaviour. The theory has, however, been disapproved being purely hypothetical in nature and has now fallen into disuse.
Bio-chemical researches tired to show that hormonal imbalances have an adverse effect on criminality. In other words, hormonal imbalances affect the thinking power of brain and control over nervous system and this may lead to criminality. But the general consensus does not accept these findings. The more accepted view is that hormonal imbalances may act as catalyst for criminal behaviour and provide a favourable biological environment for crime causation but criminality cannot be attributed to these imbalances alone. However, imbalance in sex hormones does affect human behaviour. Particularly, great hormonal changes usually occur in woman just before and during menstruation period commonly referred to us as PMT and MT.
Likewise, physiological factors such as age, sex and certain endoctrinal imbalances also seem to have a correlation with the criminality of offenders. Adolescents and juveniles are more prone to offences like stealing, vandalism and sexual assaults as they readily fall a prey to the urges of sex and other lustful activities because of their tender age. The offences of theft, gambling, drunkenness, breach of traffic rules etc., are more common with young persons who are normally between the age group of 18 to 30 years. This is probably because of the fact that these offences involve considerable display of courage, boldness and adventure which these young persons normally possess. Persons advanced in age and experience are more prone of offences like white collar crime, fraud, cheating, embezzlement etc., because the nature of those crimes require maturity of mind and tact to handle intricate situations is case of detection.
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE (V OF 1908)
Section 12 and order VII rule 11 IX rule 9(1) – It is an admitted legal position that there is no limitation for filing a suite partition and unless there is a total ouster of the right of a co-sharer from the ejmali properly he shall be deemed to be in ejmali possession of the properties sought to be partitioned,if not partitioned earlier by metes and bounds.
Harmuj Sikder Vs Ayub Ali Sikder (429)
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (V OF 1898)
Section 233-The object of this section is to save the aceused from being embarrassed in this defence if distinct ofences are tried together in one case. The legislature has engrafted certain exception of the provision contained in section 234,235,236 and 239 .
Zahed Hossain(MD) Vs state (386)
Section 235 – The various act were done in pursuance of a particular end in view and they were connected together by proximity of time, unity purpose and continuity of action those acts formed parts of the same transaction within the meaning of section 235,Cr PC.(per Siddiqur Rahman MIah J. agreeing).
Zahed Hossain(MD) Vs State ( 386)
Section 235 and 239 –The provisions of section 235 and 239 of the Code vest a discretion with the court to try offence of the kinds indicated therein jointly in the circumstances mentioned, but there is nothing in them to indicate that the court is bound to try such offences or persons together.(Per Siddiqur Rahman Miah J: agreeing).
Zahed Hossain(MD) Vs State (386)
Constitution of Bangladesh, 1972
Article 102(2)(i)-True, the rule was not issuedin the terms of Article 102 (2) (b) (I) of the constitution, but this Court can exercise such power when somebody is detaind without any lawful authority or in an unlawful manner.
Bangladesh jatiyo mohila ainjibi samity (BJMAS) Vs Ministry of Home Affairs(Spl. Original) 371
Article 102(2) (i)- In a proceeding like this , it is not the right of the parties but the rights of the children are at issue. The general assembly of the United Nations aopted a proclamation on November 20, 1959 the Declaration of the rights of the child and among the principle proclaimed,it was said:
Article 102(2)(ii)-From the case referred to, the custody of infants may be decided the writ of“The child shall enjoy special protection, shall be given opportunities and facilities, to enable him to devolap physically,mentally,morally spiritually and socially in a healthy and normal manner and in condition of freedom and dignity. In the enactment of laws for this purpose, the best interests of the child shall be the paramount consideration.”
Bangladesh Jatiya Mahila Ainjibi Samity(BJMAS)VsMinistry of Home Affairs(Spl. Orgine) 371
From the case referredto, the custody if infants may be decided in the writ of habeas corpus.The judgement also quoted afew paragraph from American Jurisprudence Volume 25 ,one of such paragraph quotes:
“A court is in no case bound deliver achild into the custady of any climent or of any person, but should ;in the exercise of a sound discretion, after a careful consideration of the facts, leave it in such custody as the welfare of the child at the time appears to require. The child’s welfare is the supreme consideration, irrespective of the rights and wrong of its contending parents,aithough the natural right of the parents are entitled to dueconsideration.”
Bangladesh Jatiyo Mahila Ainjibi Samiti (BJMAS) Vs Ministry of Home Affairs (Spl. Original)
Limitation Act (1X of 1908)
Section 19-It is an admitted legal position that there is no limitation for filing a suit for partition and unless there is a total ouster of the right of a co-sharer from the ejmali property he shall be deemed to be in ejmali possession of the properties sought to be partitioned earlier by metes and bounds.
Harmuj Sikdar Vs Ayub Ali Sikdar (429)
Md. Shahnewaz Zwaki Advocate Judge Court, Dhaka, Bangladesh.