Present:

Mr.Justice Bhabani Prasad Singha

And

Mr. Justice Mustafa Zaman Islam

Death Reference No.03 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.660 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.695 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.703 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.707 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.715 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.726 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.738 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.763 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.770 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.809 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.828 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.1176 of 2017 (arising out of J.A.No.24 of 2017)

with

Criminal Appeal No.1213 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.1694 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.2239 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.2441 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.3281 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.3359 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.2914 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.5221 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.5295 of 2017

with

Criminal Appeal No.5320 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.11 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.12 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.13 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.14 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.15 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.16 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.17 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.18 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.19 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.20 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.21 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.22 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.23 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.25 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.26 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.27 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.67 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.68 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.69 of 2017

with

Jail Appeal No.144 of 2017

The State

... Petitioner -Versus-

Lt. Col.(Rtd.)Tarek Sayed and ors.

... Condemned-Prisoners

Lt. Col.(Rtd.)Tarek Sayed

 ... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.707 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.12 of 2017)

Md. Abul Bashar

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.660 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.27 of 2017)

 Noor Hossain Councilor

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.695 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.11 of 2017)

S.I. Purnendu Bala

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.703 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.21 of 2017)

 ROG-1 Md. Arif Hossain

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.715 of 2017 and Jail Appeal Nos.16 of 2017)

 Md.Hiru Miah

... Appellant

 (In Jail Appeal No.17 of 2017)

Asaduzzaman Noor

... Appellant (In Jail Appeal No.22 of 2017)

Lt. Commander Md. Masud Rana

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.726 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.13 of 2017)

Major(Retd.) Md. Arif Hossain

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.738 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.14 of 2017)

Md. Mizanur Rahman Dipu @ Mizan

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.763 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.25 of 2017)

Md. Raham Ali

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.770 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.26 of 2017)

Habilder(49997) Md. Emdadul Haque

 ... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.809 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.15 of 2017)

Sepai Abu Taiyeb and another

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.828 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.19 of 2017)

Constable Md. Shihab Uddin

... Appellant (In Jail Appeal No.20 of 2017)

Ali Mohammad

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.1176 of 2017 arising out of Jail Appeal No.24 of 2017)

Mortuza Zaman Charchil

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.1213 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.23 of 2017)

Sarjent Md. Enamul Kabir

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.3281 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.68 of 2017)

Jamal Uddin

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.5221 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.144 of 2017)

Sainik Md. Abdul Alim

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.5295 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.67 of 2017)

Selim

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.2239 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.69 of 2017)

Lance Nayek Md. Belal Hossain

... Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.2441 of 2017 and Jail Appeal No.18 of 2017)

1. A.S.I. Md. Bazlur Rahman
2. Habilder (BGB)Md. Nasir Uddin ... convict-Appellants (In Crl. Appeal No.1694 of 2017)

1. Sainik Md. Nuruzzaman
2. ASI(S)606 Md. Abul Kalam Azad
3. Constable Md. Babul Hasan

 ...Convict-Appellants (In Crl. Appeal No.3359 of 2017)

Lance Corp. Md. Ruhul Amin

...Convict-Appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.2914 of 2017)

Const. Md. Habibur Rahman @ Habib  ...Convict-Appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.5320 of 2017)

-Versus-

The State

    ... Respondent            

Mr. Mahbubey Alam, Attorney General

with    

Mr. M. A. Mannan Mohon, D.A.G

with

Mr. K.M. Zahid Sarwar,D.A.G with

Mr. Bashir Ahamed, A.A.G with

Mr. Mian Md. Shamim Ahasan with

Mr. Kazi Md. Mahmudul Karim with

Mr. Md. Shafiquzzaan, A.A.G           

   ... For the State.

Mr. S.M. Shafiqul Islam, State Defence Lawyer

... For the Condemned-accused

Mr. Md. Ahsanullah, Advocate

... (For the appellant in                         Crl. Appeal No.703 of 2017)

Mr. Md. Iqbal Kabir, Advocate ... (For the appellant in

                        Crl. Appeal No.763 of 2017)

    Mr. S.R.M. Lutfor Rahman Akond,

... (For the appellant in

                        Crl. Appeal No.695 of 2017)     

Mr. Md. Aminul Islam, Adv. with  Mrs. Sultana Khan Ruby, Adv. ... For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.2239 of 2017)

    Mr. Md. Kamrul Alam (kamal, Adv. ... (For the appellant in

                       Crl. Appeal No.3281 of 2017)

Mr. S.M. Shahjahan, Adv. with

Mr. Md. Mohinur Rahman, Adv.

... For the appellant   (In Crl. Appeal No.738 of 2017

and Jail Appeal No.14 of 2017)

Mr.Md.Munsurul Hoque Chowdhury with                 Mr.A.K.M.Fazlur Huq Khan Farid and                 Mr.Md.Saifur Rahman Rahi, Advocates

... For the appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.707 of 2017)

Mr.Md.Munsurul Hoque Chowdhury,with                 Mr. Md. Iqbal Hossain, Advocates

... For the appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.726 of 2017)

Mr. A.S.M. Abdul Mobin, with

                Mr. Md. Humayun Bashar, Advocates ... For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.660 of 2017)

Mr. A.S.M. Abdul Mobin, with

                Mr. Md. Abdur Razzak, Advocates

... For the appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.5221 of 2017)

Mr. A.S.M. Abdul Mobin, with

                Mr. Abdullah Al-Mamun Chowdhury,Adv ... For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.828 of 2017)

Mr. A.S.M. Abdul Mobin, with

                Mr. Abdullah Al-Mamun Chowdhury,Adv ... For the appellant no.2

(In Crl. Appeal No.1694 of 2017)

Mr.A.K.M.Fazlul Huq Khan Farid,with  Mr. Saifur Rahman Rahi, Advocates

... For the appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.770 of 2017)

Mr. A.S.M.Abdul Mobin, with

                Mr. Md. Abbas Uddin, Advocates

... For the appellant no.1 (In Crl. Appeal No.715 of 2017)

Mr. Md.Khairul Alam, Advocate

... For the appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.809 of 2017)

Mr. S.M.Shahjahan, with

                Mr. Ahmed Mahabubul H.Khan, Adv. ...For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.1213 of 2017 and   Jail Appeal No.23 of 2017)

Mr. A.S.M.Abdul Mobin, with

                Mr. Sharif Arif Newaz, Advocates

... For the appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.3359 of 2017)

Mr. S.M.Shahjahan, with

                Mrs. Elida Yeasmin, Advocates ...For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.2441 of 2017)

Mr. Khan Tipu Sultan, Advocate ...For the appellant no.3 

(In Crl. Appeal No.715 of 2017)

Mr. S.M.Shahjahan, Advocate

...For the appellant (In Crl. Appeal No.2441 of 2017

and J.A.No.18 of 2017)

Mr. Md. Shafiqul Alam, Advocate ... (For the appellant no.1

(In Crl. Appeal No.1694 of 2017)

Mr.Md.Taj Muhammad Shaikh, with

Mr.Md.Jahangir Alam, Advocates ...For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.1176 of 2017)

Mr. M. Shehabul Arifin, Advocate ...For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.5295 of 2017)

Mr. Mohammad Mujibur Rahman, Adv. ...For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.5320 of 2017)

Mr. Md. Kamal Hossain, Advocate ...For the appellant

(In Crl. Appeal No.2914 of 2017)  Heard on:22.05.17,23.05.17, 24.05.17, 02.05.17, 28.05.17, 29.05.17, 30.05.17, 31.05.17, 01.06.17, 04.06.17, 05.06.17, 06.06.17,

07.06.17, 08.06.17, 02.07.17, 03.07.17, 04.07.17, 05.07.17, 06.07.17, 09.07.17, 10.07.17, 11.07.17, 12.07.17, 13.07.17,

16.07.17, 17.07.17, 18.07.17, 19.07.17, 20.07.17, 23.07.17, 24.07.17, 25.07.17 & 26.07.17.

Judgment on:22.08.2017.

Bhabani Prasad Singha,J:

This Death Reference under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1898 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Code’) has been made by the learned Sessions Judge, Narayanganj vide the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 16.01.2016 passed in Sessions Case No.103 of 2016 corresponding to G.R.Case No.328 of 2014 for confirmation of the death sentences imposed upon the condemned-prisoners namely, Lt. Colnel Tarek Syeed Mohammad, Major (retired) Md. Arif Hossain, Lt. Commander (dismissed) Masood Rana(M.M.Rana), Noor Hossain Councillor, Lance Nayek Md. Bellal Hossain,

Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque, ROG-1 Md. Arif Hossain, Lance Nayek Md. Hira Mia, Sepoy Abu Taiyab, Constable Md. Shihabuddin, S.I. Purnendubala, Sainik (dismissed) Md. Abdul Alim  (abscondoing), Sainik (dismissed) Mohiuddin Munshi (absconding), Sainik Md. Al- Amin Sharif, Sainik (dismissed) Md. Tajul Islam (absconding), Enamul Kabir (dismissed) (absconding), Md. Mortuza Zaman Churchil, Ali Mohammad, Md. Mizanur Rahman Dipu alias Mizan, Md. Raham Ali, Md. Abul Bashar, Salim (absconding), Md. Sanaulla alias Sana, Manager Shahjahan (absconding), Zamaluddin, Lance Corporal (force retirement) Md. Ruhul Amin, Corporal (dismissed) Md. Mokhlesur Rahman, ASI Abul Kalam Azad under sections 120B/302/34 of the Penal Code. By the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused-persons, namely, Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad (retired), Major (retired) Md. Arif Hossain, Lt. Commander (dismissed) Masood Rana, Noor Hossain Councillor, ROG-1 Md. Arif Hossain, Lance Nayek Md. Hira Mia, Sepoy Abu Taiyab, Constable Md. Shihabuddin, SI PurnenduBala, Sainik (dismissed) Md. Abdul Alim, Sainik Al- Amin,Lance Corporal (force retirement) Md. Ruhul Amin, Corporal (dismissed) Md. Mokhlesur Rahman, Md. Abul Kalam Azad, Sainik Md. Nooruzzaman, Constable Babul Hasan, ASI Md. Kamal Hossain and Constable Md. Habibur Rahman (absconding)under sections 120B/364/34 of the Penal Code to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Tk. 50,000/00, in default, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for another 1 (one) year each. By the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the trial Court also sentenced the accused-persons Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad, Major (retired) Md. Arif Hossain, Lt. Commander Masood Rana, Noor

Hossain Councillor, Lance Nayek Md. Bellal Hossain, Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque, Sainik Md. Asaduzzaman Noor, ROG Md. Arif Hossain, Sepoy Md. Abu Taiyab, SI Purnendubala, Sainik (dismissed) Md. Abdul Alim, Sainik (dismissed) Mohiuddin Munshi (absconding), Sainik (dismissed) Al-Amin Sharif (dismissed), Sainik Md. Tajul Islam (absconding), Md. Mortuza Zaman Churchil, Ali Mohammad, Md. Mizanur Rahman Dipu alias Mizan, Md. Raham Ali, Md. Abul Bashar, Salim (absconding), Zamaluddin, Habilder Md. Nasiruddin and ASI Bazlur Rahman under sections 120B/201/34 of the Penal Code sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 7 (seven) years and to pay a fine of Tk.50,000/00, in deafault, to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 1(one) year each.

As against the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence, the convicted- accused Md. Abul Bashar preferred Criminal

Appeal No.660 of 2017, the convicted-accused Noor Hossain Councillor preferred Criminal Appeal No.695 of 2017, the convicted-accused S.I. Purnendubala preferred Criminal Appeal No.703 of 2017, the convicted-accused Lt. Col (retired) Tarek Syeed Mohammad preferred Criminal Appeal No.707 of 2017, the convicted-accused ROG-1 Md. Arif Hossain preferred Criminal Appeal No.715 of 2017, the convicted-accused Lieutenant Commander (Dismissed) Md. Masood Rana preferred Criminal Appeal No.726 of 2017, the convicted-accused Major (Retired) Md. Arif Hossain preferred Criminal Appeal No.738 of 2017, the convicted-accused Md. Mizanur Rahman Dipu @ Mizan preferred  Criminal Appeal No.763 of 2017, the convicted-accused Md. Raham Ali preferred  Criminal Appeal No.770 of 2017, the convicted-accused Habilder (49997) Md. Emdadul Haque preferred Criminal Appeal No.809 of 2017, the convicted-accused Sepoy Abu Taiyab preferred Criminal Appeal No.828 of 2017, the convict- accused Ali Mohammad preferred  Criminal Appeal No.1176 of 2017(arising out of Jail Appeal No.24 of 2017), the convicted-accused Mortuza Zaman Churchil preferred Criminal Appeal No.1213 of 2017, the convicted-accused A.S.I. Md. Bazlur Rahman and Habilder (BGB) Md. Nasir Uddin preferred Criminal Appeal No.1694 of 2017, the convicted-accused Salim preferred Criminal Appeal No.2239 of 2017, the convicted-accused Lance Nayek Md. Bellal Hossain preferred Criminal Appeal No.2441 of 2017, the convicted-accused Lance Corporal Md. Ruhul Amin preferred Criminal Appeal No.2914 of 2017, the convicted-accused Md. Enamul Kabir preferred  Criminal Appeal No.3281 of 2017, the convicted-accused Sainik-4036506 Md. Nooruzzaman and others preferred Criminal Appeal No.3359 of 2017, the convicted-accused Jamal Uddin preferred

The aforesaid Death Reference and the Criminal Appeals being emerged out of the self-same judgment and order of conviction and sentence and the question of law and facts involved in the Death Reference and the Criminal Appeals being common, the Death Reference and the Criminal Appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this single consolidated judgment. Be it mentioned further that the facts, accused- persons, victims, and the witnesses in both the cases being same and identical, they have been heard simultaneously.

The prosecution case, in short, is that one Selina Islam, wife of the victim deceased Hazi Nazrul Islam lodged a First Information Report (hereianafter referred to as the FIR) against the convict–accused-persons stating, interalia, that the informant’s husband Nazrul Islam was a Councillor and Panel Mayor-2 of Narayanganj City Corporation. One Tanvir contractor got contract for construction of roads and drains at Mijimiji under Narayanganj City Corporation and the Mayor engaged Nazrul Islam to supervise the work. During construction works, the informant’s husband requested Mubarak for removal of his shop-Shutter in the interest of development of the local area. Without removing the said shop-shutter,  Mobarak secretly informed the matter to the accused Noor Hossain and that being informed, on 01.01.2014, the accused Noor Hossain being accompanied by 70/80 terrorists rushed to the place and practiced hooliganism. Thereafter, under Noor Hossain’s instruction Ali Hossain,

@            Shahjahan,  Badal, Iqbal and others. Rushing to the Mijimiji village Noor Hossain openly threatened Nazrul Islam and his family members in their absence for killing. After the criminal Case was lodged, the victim Nazrul took shelter at Dhaka due to such threatening and obtained anticipatory bail from the Hon’ble High Court Division and filed Hajira on 08.04.2014 at Narayanganj Court. Later, on 27.04.2014 Nazrul and others went to Narayanganj Court for Hajira and that on their way back to Dhaka from Narayanganj Court, at about 1.45 P.M., by two Mircro buses 15/16 RAB-Personnel barricaded the way of Nazrul’s private car claiming themselves as RAB Members and abducted them. Since such taking way, all abducted persons remained untraced. The Police was informed of the matter. RAB and they tried to trace out the abducted persons and it was conceived that as on 27.04.2014 the accused Noor Hossain, Haji Yasin Miah, Hasmat Ali Hashu, Aminul Islam Razoo, Anwar, Iqbal and others who threatened to kill her husband, they alongwith other 5/6 persons abducted her husband Nazrul. In view of the above, she lodged the FIR of the case. Some delay took place in lodging the FIR due to conducting search for tracing out the whereabouts of Nazrul and others. During investigation it came to light that as a sequel to previous enmity with the victim Nazrul islam, the accused Noor Hossain got the 7 (seven) victims of the case kidnapped away from the place of occurrence, got them killed and made disappearance of their dead bodies tying up the dead bodies with plastic sacks containing brick in the estuary of the rivers Meghna and Shitalakhsmya Subsequently, the dead bodies floated up.

On receipt of the FIR of the case, police took up investigation of the case and after investigation, prima-facie case having been made out against the accused-persons, submitted Charge Sheet No.232 dated 08.04.2015 of Fatulla Model P.S., Narayanganj under sections 364/302/201/109/114/120B of the Penal Code against them.

 At the commencement of trial of the case, Charge under sections 364/302/201/109/120B/34 of the Penal Code was framed against the accused-persons, namely, Noor Hossain, Lt. Col. (retired) Tarek Syeed Mohammad, Jamal Uddin (absconding), Md. Sanaulla Sana (absconding), Salim (absconding), Md. Abul Bashar, Md. Raham Ali, Ali Mohammad, Mortuza Zaman Churchil, Manager Shahjahan, Constable Md. Habibur Rahman @ Habib (absconding), Sainik Md. Nooruzzaman, Constable Md. Babul Hasan, S.I Md. Kamal Hossain, (absconding), ASI Abul kalam Azad,

Lance Corporal Md. Ruhul Amin, Corporal Md. Mokhlesur Rahman (absconding), Sainik Md. Asaduzzaman Noor, Sepoy Abu Taiyab, Sainik Md. Mohiuddin, Sainik Md. Abdul Alim, Sainik Al-Amin Sharif, Lance Nayek Md. Hira Mia, Lance Nayek Md. Bellal Hossain, ROG Md. Arif Hossain, SI Purnendu Bala, Lt. Commander Masood Rana (M.M. Rana). The Charge was read over and explained to the accused-persons Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad, Md. Abul Basher, Md. Raham Ali, Ali Mohammad, Mortuza Zaman Churchil, Manager Shahjahan Sainik Md. Nooruzzaman, Constable Md. Babul Hasan, A.S.I Abul Kalam Azad, Lance Corporal Md. Ruhul Amin, Sainik Md. Asaduzzaman Noor, Sepoy Abu Taiyab, Sainik Md. Mohiuddin, Sainik Md. Abdul Alim, Sainik Al-Amin Sharif, Lance Nayek Md. Hira Mia, Lance Nayek Md. Bellal Hossain, ROG Md. Arif Hossain, SI Purnendu Bala, Lt. Commander Masood Rana to which they pleaded not guilty claiming to be tried.

Charge under sections 302/201/109/120B/34

of the Penal Code was framed against the accused-persons Sainik Md. Asaduzzaman, Sainik Md. Tajul Islam, ASI Md. Bazlur Rahman, Habilder Md. Nasiruddin, Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque, Sergeant (retired) Md. Enamul Haque. The charge was read over and explained

to them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.   

The accused-persons, namely, Jamal Uddin (absconding), Md. Sanaulla Sana (absconding), Constable Md. Habibur Rahman @ Habib (absconding), SI Md. Kamal Hossain (absconding) and Corporal Md. Mokhlesur Rahman (absconding) being absconding, the Charge could not be read over and explained

to them.                                         

 To substantiate its case, the prosecution in all examined as many as 106 (one hundred and six) witnesses. On the other hand, none was examined on behalf of the defence.

On the closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the accused-persons, namely, Lt. Col. (retired)Tarek Syeed Mohammad, Major (retired) Md. Arif Hossain, Lt. Commander (force retirement) M.M. Rana, Lance Nayek Md. Bellal Hosain, Md. Mizanur Rahman Dipu alias Mizan, Md. Raham Ali, Sainik Md. Asaduzzaman Noor, Md. Abul Bashar, Ali Mohammad, Mortuza Zaman Churchil, Constable Md. Babul Hossain, Sainik (retired) Md. Nooruzzaman, ASI Md. Abul Kalam Azad, Lance Corporal (force retirement) Md. Ruhul Amin, Habilder BGB Md. Nasir Uddin, ASI Md. Bazlur Rahman, Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque, Constable Md. Shihabuddin, Sepoy Abu Taiyab, SI Purnendu Bala, Lance Nayek Md. Hira Mia, ROG Md. Arif Hossain and Noor Hossain were examined under section 342 of the Code to which they repeated their innocence informing the Court that they would

not adduce any evidence on their behalf seeking justice. The accused-persons Major (retired) Md. Arif Hossain, Lt. Commander (force retirement) M.M. Rana, Arif Hossain, Sainik Md. Asaduzzaman, Habilder Md. Bazlur Rahman, Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque, Constable Md. Shihabuddin, Sepoy Abu Taiyab filed written statements.  

The defence case, as it transpires from the trend of cross examination of the prosecution witnesses is the denial and the plea of innocence in the alleged occurrence.

After trial, on analysis and on perusal of the evidence and materials on record and so also on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case, the trial judge came to the finding that the prosecution succeeded in bringing home the Charge as brought against the accused-persons and accordingly, convicted and sentenced the accused-persons by the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence as said earlier.

It is against the said judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed in Sessions Case No.103 of 2016, the accused-appellants preferred the aforesaid Criminal Appeals.

At the very outset, the learned Assistant Attorney General(hereinafter referred to as the AAG) Mr. Bashir Ahmed on behalf of the State submits that after the genocide of 1971, in the history of Bangladesh, the instant case is in respect of the much discussed about  carnage in which the innocent people were killed by some members of law enforcing agency; that admittedly, RAB personnel apprehended the victim-deceased- persons and that the victim- deceased-persons were in their custody; that the accused Noor Hossain got the occurrence perpetrated by the RAB personnel as a sequel to his enmity with the victim deceased Nazrul Islam; that the

murders in this case are brutal and diabolical without any provocation in which the accused Noor Hossain is the mastermind; that the accused-persons Noor Hossain, Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad, Major (rertired) Arif Hossain and Lt. Commander M.M. Rana at different times had meeting conspiring with each other with regard to the occurrence; that the prosecution by adducing evidence established the guilt of the accused-persons beyond all reasonable doubt; that in addition to the evidence of the prosecution witnesses there are the confessional statements of most of the convicted accused-persons admitting their guilt implicating themelves and others in the alleged occurrence; that said confessional statements along with the evidence on record can be the basis for their conviction and sentence of the accused- persons; that the recording Magistrates after complying with all the legal

formalities under sections 164 and 364 of the Code recorded the confessional statements of the confessing-accused-persons; that the trial Court was well founded in law in convicting and sentencing the condemned- convict-accused-prisoners on the basis of the evidence on record and as such, the order of conviction and sentence should be maintained. The learned AAG prays for acceptance of the Death Reference and for dismissal of the criminal appeals filed by the convicted- accused-appellants. To support the prosecution case, the learned A.A.G referred the case laws reported in PLD 1979 SC at Page 53, AIR 1969 SC at page 432, AIR 1983 SC at page 680, 1971 SCR at page 599, 2006(2) Supreme Court Cases at page 450, 2012(9) SCC at page 01, 12 DLR SC at page 203, 16 DLR (SC) at page 166, 29 DLR SC at page 271, 18 BLD (AD) at page 175, PLD 1972 SC at page 363, 13 BLC (AD) at page 84, 12 BLC (AD) at

page 203, 2016(1) SC Cases at page 583, 2014 (1) SC Cases at page 216, 2013 (12) SC Cases at page 796, 1985 1 SCC at page 422, 2015(1) SC Cases at page 67, Nirvoya Gang Rape case in Criminal Appeal No.607-608/17 of the Supreme Court of India, 1985 SCC at page 423, 2012 SCC at page 03, (2000) 1 SCC at page 285, PLD 1979 SC at page 63, (2012) 1 SCC at page 10, 63 DLR (AD) at page 105, 53 DLR (AD) at page 1, 4 SCC at page 716, 67 DLR (AD) at page 99, (2016) 9 SCC at page 541, AIR 2010(SC) at page 61, 2014 SCC at page 716, (1978) 4 SCC at page 161, (2013)12 SCC at page 796, 1901 SCC at page 445, 62 DLR (AD) at page 13, (2005) 11 SCC at page 600, (2012) 7 SCC at page 646, 42 DLR (AD) at page 473, (2000) 1 SCC at page 285, (2013) 12 SCC at page 796.

Mr. Mahbubey Alam, the learned Attorney General for Bangladesh also representing the State submits that in this case the victims

were killed by the members of the law enforcing agencies who were supposed to protect the victim-deceased-persons and the lives of the citizens of the country, not by miscreants; that in this case apart from the confessional statements of the accused- persons there are also other evidence to support the case of the prosecution; that the accused-persons unanimously  narrated the occurrence, situation thereof implicating themselves in the occurrence; that the murder in question is a preplanned one out of conspiracy; that before the occurrence, the accused Major (retired) Arif Hossain directed to note the names of the accused Purnendu Bala and others to the P.W.72 Sainik Milon Hossain and to keep separated the said persons from others forbidding to give them any duty and not to take their information suggesting  that it was a preplan  and conspiracy; that the prosecution adduced

evidence of each segment of the case i.e. abduction, killing, making disappearance of the dead bodies of the victims and recovery of the dead bodies etc.; that the evidence of the P.Ws.64 and 66 is enough to prove the chase and abduction of the victims in this case; that before killing the victims, the materials were collected and sacks with brick were prepared for drowning the dead bodies of the victims into water which also suggest preplan and conspiracy; that in a case like this, it is not supposed that there would be direct evidence; that there is circumstantial evidence with regard to the killing of the victims and also the confessional statements of them convicted-accused-appellants; that the victims were killed while they were in the custody of the accused-RAB-personnel and as such, the responsibility is cast upon the accused-RAB-personnel to explain how the victims had died; that if there was the

intention of arresting the victims, then there could be no earthly reason as to why the victims would be taken to Narsingdi instead of Narayanganj and as such, it was definitely not the case of arresting, rather, abduction for killing; that the prosecution could prove the guilt of the convicted- accused-appellants to the hilt and as such, there is  nothing to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence and as such, the impugned judgment and order of conviction should be upheld and confirmed. The learned Attorney General further submits that to restore the dignity and prestige of RAB and to return confidence and faitn in the RAB, the accused-RAB personnel in the case be dealt with seriously.

Mr. Ahsanullah, the learned Advocate representing the condemned-accused-prisoner S.I. Purnendu Bala in Criminal Appeal No.703 of 2017 in Death Reference No.03 of 2017 submits that the charge in the case was not properly framed; that  the Investigating Officer did not take out the investigation of the case properly; that it is a case of no evidence although 106 Prosecution witnesses were examined by the State in the case; that the confessional statement of SI Purnendu Bala is not true and voluntary; that the Investigating Officer did not investigate as to who were actually present at the place of occurrence and at the time of occurrence; that the Investigating  Officer did not examine the inmates of any house, shop keepers of any shop situated near the place of occurrence; that the money transaction as alleged by the prosecution could not be proved in the case; that the Post Mortem Examination Reports of the deceased-persons are not consistent with the prosecution case. The learned Advocate further submits that the

Mr. Md. Iqbal Hossain, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accued- appellant Mizanur Rahman Dipu @ Mizan in Criminal Appeal Nos.763 of 2017 submits that this convict-accused is not an FIR named accused; that the 4 confessing accused- persons who mentioned his name in their confessional statemetns did say nothing about his activities in the alleged occurrence and that they only said that he was with them in the microbus; that in the FIR the informant did say nothing about him; that there was a system of pick and choose in respect of involving this convict in the case; that the framing of Charge in the case is exaggerated. The learned Advocate further submits that in recording the confessional statements of the 4 confessing accused- persons implicating him in the alleged occurrence, the provision of law was not followed. The learned Advocate also referred the cases reported in 4 BLD (AD) at page 193 and 17 DLR (AD) at page 139 to support the case of this convicted-accused-appellant in the case.

Advocate Mr. S.R.M. Lutfor Rahman Akond, representing the convict-accused Noor Hossain in Criminal Appeal No.695 of 2017 submits that on the basis of presumption, the informant lodged the FIR of the case; that the Investigating Officer did not take out the investigation of the case properly; that the framing of Charge in the case is defective; that the confessional statements as made by the accused-persons are not true and voluntary; that the criminal conspiracy as alleged against the accused Noor Hossain was not proved; that the P.Ws. did not mention the name of the accused Noor Hossain in their evidence; that he is entitled to an order of acquittal as the prosecution could not prove the case against him on setting aside the impugned judgment and order of conviction and sentence. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 68 DLR at page 59, 8 BLC (AD) at page 166,

36 DLR (AD) at page 58, 5 BLC (AD) at page 20, 22 DLR (AD) at page 266, 60 DLR (AD) at page 347, 54 DLR (AD) at page 80, 12 BLC at page 203, 41 DLR (AD) at page 62, 40 DLR (AD) at page 186, 29 DLR (AD) at page 29, 37 DLR (AD) at page 139, 39 DLR (AD) at page 117, 44 DLR (AD) at page 10, 18 BLD (AD) at page 43, 66 DLR (AD) at page 06.

Mr. Md. Kamrul Alam, the learned Advocate representing  the accused Sergeant Enamul Kabir in Criminal Appeal No.3280 of 2017 submits that this convict-accused is not FIR named; that the Charge Sheet has been submitted against this accused on the basis of the confessional statements of the co- accused-persons; that the charge against the accused-appellant was not framed properly; that the confessing accused-persons did not implicate him in the alleged murder; that the case being not proved against this convicted- accused, he is entitled to an order of acquittal.

Mr. S.M. Shajahan, the learned Advocate representing the condemned-accused-prisoner Major (retired) Arif Hossain in Criminal Appeal No.738 of 2017 in Death Reference No.03 of 2017 submits that here two different cases were disposed of simultaneously; that the commencement of the trial of the case is a mischief done by the trial Court and this is not a simultaneous trial; that there is no order of the trial Court or of the High Court Division is there to dispose of the cases simultaneously; that there should have been an order by the trial Court to the effect that that the cases would be disposed of simultaneously and as such, the trial of the case is vitiated; that suspicion cannot be the basis of conviction and that in Sessions Case No.103 of 2016, there is no legal evidence  against this accused and as such,

he is entitled to an order of acquittal in the case; that the confessional statements of the confessing accused-persons have not been recorded as per law; that the confessional statement of the accused-persons are not true and voluntary; that the statements of some of the accused-persons under section 161 of the Code being recorded at a belated stage, their evidence cannot be relied upon; that there is no mention of the names of the accused- persons in the Inquest Report; that the charge against this convicted-accused being not proved beyond reasonable doubt, he is entitled to an order of acquittal; that the examination of the convicted-accused Major (retired) Arif Hossain under section 342 of the Code was not done properly; that the prosecution could not prove the case against the convicted-accused Major (retired) Arif Hossain by legal evidence; that exchange of money between the accused Major (retired)

Arif Hossain and the accused Noor Hossain was not proved. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in AIR 37 (1950) Allahabad at page 119, PLD 1976 Lahore at page 1446, PLD 1986 SC at page 146, 56 DLR at page 185, 2008 PCrlg at page 523, 43 DLR (AD) at page 62, AIR 1953 SC at page 468, PLD 2003 Lahore 217, 16 BLD at page 121, 16 BLD at page 552, 36 DLR at page 185, 45 DLR at page 171, 2 DLR at page 39, 27 DLR (AD) at page 29, 19 BLC (AD) at page 95, 1950 SCR India at page 526, 12 DLR SC at page 512, 41 DLR (AD) at page 157, 35 DLR at page 119, 21 DLR SC at page 88, 40 DLR at page 443, 15 BLD

(AD) at page 154, 38 DLR (AD) at page 311, 6 BCR (AD) at page 225, 39 DLR (AD) at page 117, 60 DLR (AD) at page 05, 1987 BCR (AD) at page 140, 1986 BCR (AD) at page 225, PLD 1963 West Pakistan (Peshoar) at page 1178, AIR 1934(Kolkatta) at page 678 and 2 BCR at page 292.

Mr. Munsurul Hoque Chowdury, the learned Advocate representing the condemned-accused- prisoner Lt. Commander M.M. Rana and Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad submits that there should have been one trial in the two cases, not two; that the Sessions Case No.1748 of 2016 has no legal value; that no element of section 120 B of the Penal Code is there in the Charge Sheet; that as the convicted- acused acted as per the command of his higher authority, he is entitled to the benefit of section 79 of the Penal Code; that framing of Charge in both the cases are defective; that except sending trawler to the Kanchpur Landing Station, there is nothing against the accused Lt. Commander M.M. Rana; that this accused had no knowledge of the occurrence and had no meeting of mind with the other accused-persons; that the accused Lt. Commander M.M. Rana acted as per the order of the accused Major (retired) Arif Hossain; that the confessional statement of the accused Lt. Commander M.M. Rana is not a confessional statement as per section 164 of the Code; that being directed by his superior Commander the accused Lt. Col.Tarek Syeed Mohammad, he assisted the accused Major (retired) Arif Hossain and took part in the operation; that the total planning of the operation was made by accused Major (retired) Arif Hossain, not by him; that the accused Raham Ali did not utter a single word about conspiracy; that there is no finding with regard to conspiracy in the judgment of the trial Court; that there is no direct allegation of commission of offence under section 302 of the Penal Code against him and that there is no common intention of him with the accused Major (retired) Arif Hossain to kill the victims; that this convicted- accused-appellant was not properly charged under sections 302/120B of the Penal Code.

The learned Advocate lastly submits that the accusation against this convict-accused being not proved, he is entitled to an order of acquittal. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 42 DLR (AD)at page 50, 4 BLC (AD) at page 223, 53 DLR at page 438, (2010) 2 Supreme Court Cases at page 91, 29 DLR (SC) at page 246, 42 DLR (AD) at page 50, AIR 1940 Calcutta at page 561, 19 DLR at page 573, 67 DLR (AD) at page 6, 49 DLR at page 373, 47 DLR at page 317, 11 BLD at page 158, 7 BLD (AD) at page 1, 13 BLT at page 524, 5 ALR(AD) at page 97, 55 DLR at page 382, 17 BLC at page 10.

Mr. S.M. Mobin, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused-persons Jamal Uddin and Abul Bashar in Criminal Appeal No.5221 of 2017 and Criminal Appeal No.660 of 2017 submits that the convicted- accused Jamal had no confessional statement and that there is no evidence against him and that excepting the confessional statements of the four co-accused-persons, no witnesses mentioned about him in their evidence; that there is no direct evidence with regard to commission of murder against this convicted- accused-persons; that the confessional statements of the accused-persons being recorded after remand, such confessional statements are not true and voluntary; that the presence of the accused-persons at the place of occurrence is doubtful; that the criminal conspiracy as alleged against these convicted-accused-persons could not be proved.  The learned Advocate Prays for acquittal of these convicted-accused-persons from the charge brought against them. The learned Advocte also referred the case laws reported in 49 CWN at page 6768 and 20 BLC(AD) at page 125.

The learned Advocate S.M. Mobin representing the convicted-accused-persons ROG Md. Arif Hossain, Asaduzzaman Noor, Constable Shihab, Habilder Nasir Uddin and Sepoy Abu Taiyab in Criminal Appeal No.715 of 2017 submits that the act of this convicted- accused-persons may be brought under section 34 of the Penal Code, not under section 120B of the Penal Code; that excepting the convicted-accused Taiyab, no allegation of taking part in commission of murder of the victims is there against these convicted- accused-persons. The learned Advocate lastly prays for acquittal of these convicted- accused-persons. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 3 SCC 1988 at page 609, 22 BLC (AD) at page 155, 67 DLR (AD) at page 7, 18 BLC (AD) at page 81.

Mr. A.K.M. Fazlul Huq Khan Farid, the learned Advocate representing the condemned- accused-prisoners Tarek Syeed Mohammad in Criminal Appeal No.707 of 2017 and the accused Md. Raham Ali in Criminal Appeal No.770 of 2017 submits that the convicted- accused Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad is not an FIR named accused; that the FIR is not a substantive evidence and the case is based on the Charge Sheet; that the judgment of the trial Court is based on the confessional statements of the confessing-accused-persons after taking them on remand time and again and as such, the confessional statements of the confessing accused-persons are not true and voluntary; that there is no element of section 120B of the Penal Code in the case; that except the confessional statements, there is no evidence against this convicted- accused; that the confessional statement of the accused Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad warrants no death sentence to him; that the accused Md. Raham Ali being an employee, cannot be a conspirator; that there is no evidence against these accused-persons. The learned Advocate prays for acquittal of these

convicted-accused-persons. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 53 DLR at page 287 and 40 DLR (AD) at page 106.

In addition to the submission of the learned Advocate Mr. A.K.M. Fazlul Huq Khan Farid, the learned Advocate Mr. Munsurul Hoque Chowdhury submits that no person of the RAB Head Office was examined in the case; that the accused Lt. Col. (retired) Tarek Syeed Mohammad had no complicity in the occurrence of kidnapping, killing and making disappearance of the dead bodies of the victim-decesed-persons; that the investigation of the case is perfunctory; that charge under section 120 B of the Penal Code in the case is not proved against this accused; that this accused was not in furtherance of common intention of all the accused-persons in the case to commit the offence and that at best the act of the accused Lt. Col. Tarek Syeed Mohammad may come under the purview of section 364 of the Penal Code. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 17 BLC at page 10 and 51 DLR at page 16.

Mr. Ahmed Mahabubul H. Khan, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellant Mortuza Zaman Churchil in Criminal Appeal No.1213 of 2017 submits that this convicted-accused-appellant is not FIR named; that on the basis of the confessional statement of this accused, he was included in the Charge Sheet; that no other witnesses implicated him in the alleged occurrence; that this convicted-accused did not admit his guilt in the offence; that the statement of this convicted-accused is exculpatory in nature and that it is a case of no evidence. The learned Advocate lastly submits that this convicted-accused may kindly be acquitted from the case.

Mr. Md. Khairul Alam, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellant Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque in Criminal Appeal No.809 of 2017 submits that this convicted-accused was not present at the time of killing of the victims; that starting of the case against this convict accused is illegal; that as the victim Nazrul  had popularity, instead of taking the victims to Naraynaganj, the victims were taken to Narsingdi; that framing of charge against this convicted-accused is defective and that the confessional statement of this accused is neither  true nor voluntary. The learned Advocate lastly prays for acquittal of this convicted-accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove the charge against him.

Mr. S.M. Shafiqul Islam, the learned State Defence Layer representing the absconding convicted-accused-persons,

namely, Sainik Mohiuddin Munshi, Sainik Al- Amin Sharif, Sainik Md. Tajul Islam, Md. Sanaulla @ Sana and Manager Shajahan adopting the submission of the learned Advocate Mr. S.M. Shahjahan submits that the names of these convict-accused-appellants are not there in the FIR; that none of the witnesses mentioned the names of these accused- appellants involving them in the alleged occurrence. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 54 DLR (AD) at page 34, 67 DLR (AD) at page 7 and 18 BLC (AD) at page 81.

Mr. S.M. Shahjahan, the learned Advocate with Mrs. Elida Yeasmin, the learned Advocates representing the convicted-accused Lance Nayek Md. Bellal Hossain in Criminal Appeal No.2441 of 2017 submit that this accused knew nothing about the occurrence from before; that his confessional statement is not a true and a voluntary one; that the charge against this accused being not proved, he is entitled to an order of acquittal.

Mr. Md. Aminul Islam, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellant Salim in Criminal Appeal No.2239 of 2017 submits that this accused is not an FIR named accused; that there is no evidence against him; that no witness implicated him in the alleged occurrence and that he has been convicted on the basis of the confessional statements of the other accused- persons; that the abscondence of this accused by itself is not a conclusive evidence. The learned Advocate further submits that the allegation against this convicted-accused being not proved, he is entitled to an order of acquittal in the case. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 1984 BLD (AD) at page 103, 13 BLC (AD) at page 17, 14 BLC (AD) at page 67, 11 BLC (AD) at page 49, 9 BLC (AD) at page 59, 44 DLR

(AD) at page 10, 12 DLR (SC) at page 217, 56 DLR (AD) at page 132, 47 DLR at page 467, 1 BLC at page 325, 1 BLC at page 539, AIR 1979 (SC) at page 1382.

Mr. Khan Tipu Sultan, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellant  Lance Nayek Md. Hira Miah in Criminal Appeal No.715 of 2017 submits that excepting the confessional statement of this accused, there is no ocular evidence against him in this case; that in recording the confessional statement of this accused, legal requirements of sections 164 and 364 of the Code were not followed; that the confessional statement of this convicted-accused was extracted  by coercion after long police detention; that the confessional statement is not true and voluntary; that in the matters of conspiracy, abduction and killing he was not a party. The learned Advocate lastly prays for moderate punishment of this accused other than death.

Mr. Taz Mohammad Sheikh, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellant Ali Mohammad in Criminal Appeal No.1176 of 2017 submits that this accused- appellant is not an FIR named accused; that excepting the P.W.1, no other  witness mentioned his name; that he had no participation in the alleged murder; that the allegation of commission of murder against the other convicted-accused-persons in the case is correct but in case of this accused- appellant there is suspicion with regard to his participation in the alleged occurrence; that his confession is not true and voluntary. The learned Advocate lastly prays for acquittal of this convicted-accused- appellant. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 1 MLR at page 205, 13 BLD at page 179, 11 BLD at page 147, 40 DLR at page 154, 44 DLR at page 295 and 59 DLR at page 345.

Mr.  Md. Shafiqul Alam, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellants ASI Bazlur Rahman and Nasir Uddin in Criminal Appeal No.1694 of 2017 submits that the confessional statement of the accused-persons in the case are not true and voluntary; that this convicted accused- appellants just complied with the order of his superiors; that no other witnesses stated their names; that who recorded the statement of this accused was not examined and as such, the statement is not admissible. The learned Advocate lastly prays for acquittal of these convicted-accused-appellants.

Mr. M. Shehabul Arefin, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellant Sainik Md. Abdul Alim in Criminal Appeal No.5295 of 2017 submits that this accused-appellant did not make confessional statement; that he was not in any conspiracy for killing the victims; that under compelling circumstances he brought the trawler; that there is no overt act of him in the alleged occurrence. The learned Advocate lastly prays for acquittal of this convict- accused-appellant. The learned Advocate also referred the case laws reported in 22 BLC (AD) at page 155, 67 DLR (AD) at page 06 and AIR 1998 at page 2443.

Mr.  Md. Kamrul Alam, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused Md. Enamul Kabir in Criminal Appeal No.3281 of 2017 submits that this accused-appellant did not make any confessional statement; that he was not in the raiding party; that none entangled him in the alleged killing; that no independent witness said that this convicted- ccused got into the trawler. The learned Advocate lastly prays for acquittal of this convicted-accused.

Mr. Mohammad Mujibur Rahman, the learned Advocate representing the convicted-accused- appellant Md. Habibur Rahman in Criminal Appeal No.5320 of 2017 submits that this accused did not make any confessional statement; that he has been implicated in this case on the basis of the confessional statements made by the accused-persons Lt. Commander M.M. Rana, Abul Kalam Azad, Sainik Md. Nooruzzaman, Babul Hassan and  Ruhul Amin; that he did not go to Narsingdi or to the landing station; that the prosecution could not bring home the charge as brought against him. The learned Advocate prays for acquittal of this accused-appellant. The learned Advocate also referred the case reported in 67 DLR (AD) at page 6.

In view of the submissions and the counter submissions of the learned Attorney General Mr. Mahubey Alam, the learned Deputy General (DAG) Mr. K.M. Zahid Sarwar, the learned Assistant Attorney General (AAG) Mr. Bashir Ahmed and the learned Advocates for the convicted-accused-appellants as stated above, this Court is to review the relevant evidence and materials on record and scan the attending circumstances of the case to arrive at a proper and correct decision. 

In this case, admittedly, the five victims, namely, (1) Hazi Nazrul Islam, (2) Maniruzzaman Khan Swapan, (3) Sirajul Islam Liton, (4) Tajul Islam and (5) Md. Jahangir Hossain were kidnapped, killed and their dead bodies were drowned in the river water which subsequently floated up.

The P.W.1 Selina Islam, the informant and the wife of the victim (deceased) Nazrul Islam deposed that on 27.04.2014 A.D at about 01-40/01-45 P.M. the occurrence took place on the road situated in front of ‘Fatulla Osman Ali Stadium’. The victim deceased Nazrul was the panel Mayor of Narayanganj City

Corporation and that he was also the Councilor of ward No.2, Narayanganj City Corporation bestowed responsibility upon Nazrul for looking after the construction works of drain and road. One Mobarak, the relation of the accused Noor Hossain refused to shift his shop and informed Noor Hossain of the matter. Being informed, Noor Hossain and others rushed there with pistol, hocky stick, lathi etc. and damaged shops and plundered goods and injured several persons. Ali Hossain, the son of Mobarak with the help of Noor Hosssain filed a criminal case against Nazrul and 16 others and openly threatened in the locality to kill Nazrul and his family members. Being afraid, the victim- deceased Nazrul left the locality and took shelter in Dhaka and obtained bail from the Hon’ble High Court in the case. The victim- deceased Nazrul filed ‘hazira’ on 27.04.2014 at about 10.00 a.m. before Narayanganj Court

with his case partners. After Hazira, 05 (five) persons including the victim-deceased Nazrul started for Dhaka by a private car and that on their way to Dhaka, at about 01.45 P.M., two Hiace microbuses with 20/25 miscreants identifying themselves as ‘RAB’ personnel by dragging out from the private car hijacked the victim-deceased-Nazrul and others and got them into microbus forcibly. Before the said occurrence, she talked lastly with the victim-deceased-Nazrul at about 1.30 P.M from her (P.W.1) TNT number. As the mobile of the victim –deceased-Nazrul and others were switched-off, she (P.W.1) and others tried to trace out the victim (deceased) and others and the matter was informed to Police Super and RAB-11, Narayanganj. Thereafter, on 28.04.2014 A.D. she lodged the FIR of the case. This witness proved the FIR as Exhibit-1 and her signature therein as Exhibit-1/1. This witness further deposed that prior to the alleged occurrence Noor Hossain and others threatened to kill the victim Nazrul and his family members. So, she filed the case against Noor Hossain and others. Under Noor Hossain’s conspiracy and leadership of the accused Tarek Syeed Mohammad, the accused-persons Arif Hossain and other RAB pronnel perpetrated the alleged occurrence and that the accused-persons Ali Mohammad, Raham Ali, Mortuza Zaman Churchil, Mizanur Rahman Dipu, Abul Bashar and Noor Hossain assisted ‘RAB’ personnel in killing the victim-deceased-Nazrul.

In her cross this witness stated that the occurrence took place on 27.04.2014 A.D. She lodged the FIR reciting unknown ‘RAB’ personnel and unknown miscreants. Later, she (the Pw1) could know from common people and from Shahidul and his (Shahidul’s) daughter about the hijacking of her husband. She also heard from the people that in the name of

‘RAB’, the victims were abducted. As the mobile phone of the victim (deceased) was switched-off, she along with others went to Narayanganj and informed the local MP of the occurrence in details. She went to ‘RAB’ office and orally informed ‘RAB’ office of the occurrence. Through ‘media’, news was made about floating of the dead bodies of the victims. Khan Osman Stadium Road was the alleged place of occurrence. She intimated the local Mayor of the alleged occurrence. The accused Noor Hossain threatened the victim-deceased-Nazrul with death before the occurrence. The victim Nazrul was the councilor of ward no.2 and that the accused Noor Hossain was the councilor of ward no.4. The accused-persons have not been implicated in the instant case falsely. As the accused- persons committed the alleged offences, the Investigating Officer duly sent-up the accused persons in the Charge-Sheet.

The P.W.2 Isob Mia, the brother of the deceased stated in his deposition that on 27.04.2014 his brother was missing. On 30.04.2014 his dead body was found at Dhaleswari village on the bank of the river Shitalakshmya being tied up with brick at the hands and legs. Police made inquest on the dead body and prepared Inquest Report. He attested the Inquest Report as a witness. This witness proved the Inquest Report as Exhibt-2 and his signature therein as Exhibit-2/1.

In his cross this witness stated that he saw the dead body in floating condition in the river and identified it. The Inquest Report was prepared on the bank of the river.

The P.W.3 Md. Hossain stated in his deposition that the dead bodies of the deceased-persons Advocate Chandan Babu and Ibrahim were lifted up from the river on 30.08.2014 at 5.00 p.m. Police held inquest on the dead body. He attested the Inquest Report. This witness proved his signature in the Inquest Report as Exhibit-2/2. This witness further deposed that the dead bodies were tied up with rope.

This witness stated in his cross that he did not read the Inquest Report as he was an illiterate man. Hearing news, he went to the place where the dead bodies were lifted. The Inquest Report was made on the bank of the river. Seeing the dead body of his brother floating, he identified it.

The P.W.4 K.M. Mohiuddin, Senior Judicial Magistrate, Narayanganj deposed that on 04.06.2014 he recorded the confessional statement of the accused Md. Arif Hossain under section 164 of the Code observing all the legal formalities. This witness proved the confessional statement as Exhibit-3 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-3(1)-3(6).

This witness further deposed that on 05.06.2014 he recorded the statement of the accused Md. Masood Rana under section 164 of the Code observing all the legal formalities. This witness proved the confessional statement of the accused Masood Rana as Exhibit-4 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-4(1)-4(6).

This witness further deposed that on 14.06.2014 he recorded the confessional statement of the accused Mortuza Zaman Churchil. This witness proved the confessional statement as Exhibit-5 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-5(1)-5(6).

This witness further deposed that on 18.06.2014 he recorded the confessional statement of the accused Tarek Syeed Mohammad as per law. This witness proved the confessional statement as Exhibit-6 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-6(1)-6(6).

This witness further deposed that on 30.08.2014 he recorded the confessional statement of the accused Lance Nayek Md. Hira Miah as per law. This witness proved the confessional statement as Exhibit-7 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-7(1-7(6).

This witness further deposed that on 13.09.2014 he recorded the confessional statement of the accused S.I. Purnendu Bala as per law. This witness proved the confessional statement as Exhibit-8 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-8(1)-8(6).

This witness further deposed that on 28.03.2014 he recorded the confessional statement of Md. Raham Ali as per law. This witness proved the confessional statement as Exhibit-9 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-9(1)-9(5). This witness further deposed that all confessing accused-persons put their signatures in the statements in his presence. He recorded the statements of the

said accused-persons under section 164 of the Code. In addition to the aforesaid accused- persons, he recorded the statements of the witnesses Md. Shahidul Islam @ Khoka and Rabeya Akhter Ankhi on 22.05.2014. This witness proved the statements as Exhibits-10 and 11 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-10/1-11/1.

This witness further deposed that on 18.08.2014, he recorded the statement of the witness S.I. Polash Golder. This witness proved the statement as Exhibit-12 and his signature therein as Exhibit-12/1.

In his cross, this witness stated that he recorded the statements in his office. As per the desire of the accused-persons, he recorded their confessional statements. He wrote in the confessional statements that of their own accord the accused-persons voluntarily made the statements. After remand the accused-persons were produced before him.

He wrote questionnaire and stated to the accused-persons. At the time of recording the statement of the accused-persons, exccepting him and the accused-persons, none else was present. The accused Noor Hossain was produced at 9.10 a.m. before him for recording his statement under section 164 of the Code. On 14.06.2014 at 9.15 a.m., the accused Churchill was produced before him for recording his statement. On 28.03.2015, the accused Raham Ali was produced before him for recording confessional statement. He recorded the confessional statement of the accused Constable Shihab on 04.09.2014. He was produced before him on 04.09.2014 at 9.15 a.m. This witness denied the defence- suggestions that he did not record statements of the confessing accused-persons as per provision of section 164 of the Code or that the accused-persons did not make the statement voluntarily or that the statement

of the confessing accused-persons were not correct or that the confessional statements were not read over to the accused-persons.

The P.W.5 Md. Belayet Hossain stated in his deposition that at the time of occurrence he was attached to Bandar P.S. On 30.04.2014 at the instruction of the Officer-in-Charge vide G.D.E. No. 1154 he went to Shantinagar on the bank of river Shitalakshmya and held inquest on the dead bodies of two persons and thereafter, sent the dead bodies through Constable No.909 Ramjan Ali to Victoria Sadar Hospital for autopsy. He preapared Inquest Report. This witness proved the Inquest Report as Exhibit-13 and his signature therein as Exhibit-13/1. He seized the articles which he found with the dead bodies of the deacesed-persons. This witness proved the Seizure Lists as Exhibits-14 and 15 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-14/1 and 15/1. This witness further deposed that the articles which were found with the dead body of Chandan were brick, platic sack, ring, payjama and jute-rope. He held inquest on the dead body of the deceased Chandan as well. This witness proved the Seizure List as Exhibit-2 and his signature therein as Exhibit2/1. He sent the dead body of Nazrul to Victoria Hospital with Contasble Abdul Quddus for autopsy for determination of cause of his death.

In his cross this witness stated that he held Inquest on the dead bodies of Chandan Babu and Nazrul. No doctor was present at the time of holding Inquest. He did not mention the cause of death in the Inquest Report. He himself made the G.D.E. This witness denied the defence-suggestion that he held Inquest on the dead body of an unknown Hindu.

The P.W.6 constable Ramzan Mridha deposed that on 30.04.2014 he accompanied SI Belayet and SI Mizan to the bank of the river Shitalakshmya to see the dead bodies in floating condition. He took the dead bodies of Chandan Sarker and that of Ibrahim to Hospital for autopsy. This witness proved his signatures in the Chalan. The defence declined to cross examine this witness.

The P.W.7 SI. Md. Mizanur Rahman deposed that on 30.04.2014 at 03.45 p.m. he held Inquest on the dead body of the deceased Ibrahim (48) on the bank of the river Shitalakshmya and prepared the Inquest Rport and sent the dead body to morgue for autopsy.He seized alamats viz. Punjabi, 20 brick, plastic-sacks, belt, jute-rope and jangia etc. under a Seizure List. This witness proved the Seizure List as Exhibits- 18 and 19 and his signatures therein as Exhibits-18(1) and 19/1. This witness proved the Inquest Report as the Exhibit-2 and his signature therein as Exhibit-2/3.

In his cross this witness stated that there was no mention of cause of death in his report. At present he was attached to Narsinghi Sadar P.S. as an S.I.

The P.W.8. Abul Kalam Azad deposed that on 27.04.2014 A.D he came to Narayanganj Court for his case-hazira. 17 persons including the victim Nazrul, Swapan came to the Court for filing hazira and that after filing hazira they returned back. Chairman Nazrul proceeded towards Dhaka with Swapan by the private car of Swapan. Returning back to his residence, he heard that the victims Nazrul Chairman, Swapan, Ibrahim and others had been kidnapped. Thereafter, he alongwith others tried to trace out the kidnapped persons but failed. 01/02 days later, he heard that some dead bodies were floating in the river.

In his cross this witness stated that he also stated to police what he said today. 

The P.W.9 Zahangir Alam Tipu deposed that the occurrence took ploace on 27.04.2014. The victim-deceased Nazrul went to Court for Hazira. He went to the Court to meet Nazrul and after meeting Nazrul returned back to Adamzee. He, thereafter, came to know thorough media that 05 persons were kidnapped and were kept concealed. Later, he came to learn that 7(seven) dead bodies were recovered. 

In his cross this witness stated that he said to police what he said to day in the Court.

The P.W.10 Md. Fakhrul Islam deposed that the occurrence took place on 27.04.2014 at about 1.00/1.30 p.m. The victim-deceased Swapan was his friend. He went to the Court to meet Swapan. Swapan went to Dhaka and he went to Adamzee. Trough TV he heard in the evening that Nazrul and others had been kidnapped. Later, he heard that RAB-personnel kidnapped Nazrul and others and that in total 07 persons were kidnapped. He subsequently heard that the dead bodies were found at the river side.

This witness denied the defence- suggestion that being influenced he deposed falsely.

The P.W.11 Chandni Rupam, Senior Judicial Magistrate, Narayanganj deposed that on 01.04.20015 observing legal formalities she recorded the confessional statement of the accused Abul Basahr under section 164 of the Code in connection with Fatulla P.S. Case No. 11(5)14 dated 27.04.2014 under sections 364/302/201 of the Penal Code. Accused Abul Bashar made the statement of his own will in sound mind. This witness proved the statement as Exhibit-20 and her signatures therein as Exhibits-20(1)-20(6).

This witness further deposed that on 24.07.2014 she recorded the confessional statement of the accused Md. Ali Mohammad under section 164 of the Code in connection with Fatulla P.S. Case No. 11(5)14 dated 27.04.2014 under sections 364/302/201 of the Penal Code. The accused Md. Ali Mohammad made the statement voluntarily in sound mind. This witness proved the statement as Exhibit-21 and her signatures therein as Exhibits-21(1)- 21(6).

This witness further deposed that on 30.08.2014 she recorded the confessional statement of the accused Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque under section 164 of the Code in connection with Fatulla P.S. Case No. 11(5)14 under sections 364/302/201 of the Penal Code. The accused Habilder Md. Emdadul Haque made

the statement voluntarily in sound mind. This

witness proved the statement as Exhibit-22 and her signatures therein as Exhibits-22(1)- 22(6).

This witness further deposed that on 08.12.2014 she recorded the confessional statement of the accused Md. Abul Kalam Azad under section 164 of the Code in connection with Fatulla P.S. Case No. 11(5)14 under sections 364/302/201 of the Penal Code. The accused Md. Abul Kalam Azad made the statement voluntarily in sound mind. This witness proved the statement as Exhibit-22 and her signatures therein as Exhibits-23(1)- 23(6).

This witness further deposed that she also recorded the statement of the witness Major Md. Suruj Mia under section 164 of the Code. This witness proved the statement as Exhibit-24 and her signatures therein as Exhibit-24(1).

In her cross this witness stated that before recording the confessional statements she put the five substantial questions to the confessing accused-persons. She properly recorded the confessional statements. She recorded the statements in her chamber at Narayanganj. After four days’ remand the accused Abul Bashar was brought to her. She gave three hours’ time for speculation to the accused Ali Mohammad. She recorded two confessional statements in two cases. The accused Emdadul Haque was brought to her on 30.08.2014 at 09.20 a.m. This witness denied the defence-suggestions that the confessing accused-persons did not make the statements voluntarily or that she did not record the statements as per law or that the confessional statements were extracted by coercion. 

The P.W.12 Mizanur Rahman deposed that on 30.04.2014 in his presence two Hiace Microbuses, one white colour and one blue colour and a trawler were seized. On 30.04.2014 two sacks with a dead body were seized under a Seizure List. This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit-21(1). This witnmess further deposed that rope, shoe, Gabardin Pant and belt of his brother Maniruzzaman Khan Swapan were also seized. Cords (rope), shoe, belt pants w1ere also seized in his presence. The occurrence took place on 27.04.2014 at 1.30/2.00p.m. On 27.04.2014 he was at work at Adamjee. While he was going along the road, Shahjahan, the case partner of his brother Nooruzzaman told him that his brother and Nazrul were not being found. Forthwith, he made phone call to Ismail who accompanied his brother Maniruzzaman. Ismail told him that his brother was also not being found. Hearing this, he went to the house of councillor Nazrul to see that wife of Nazrul went to

 In his cross this witness stated that he told the Investigating Officer that Noor Hossain might cause harm to Nazrul. For release of Nazrul he made human chain. He put signatures in two Seizure Lists. He had talks with the Officer who held Inquest on the dead body. He could identify the dead body of his brother. Keeping the sacks in water the ropes were cut. He accompanied the wife of Nazrul to the Police Station. On the date of the recovery of the dead bodies he made statement to the Investigating Officer. This witness denied the defence-suggestions that he falsely implicated RAB-personnel in the case or that he deposed falsely. 

The P.W.13 Hazi Md. Shahidul Islam deposed that the occurrence took plce on 27.04.2014 at about 1.45 p.m. on the road of Osmani Stadium. On that day Chairman Nazrul along with his case partners, namely, Tajul, Swapan, Liton, Jahangir came to Narayanganj to give hazira. On their way back after giving hazira, Nazrul, Tajul, Swapan, Liton and Jahangir were kidnapped. Towards 2.00 p.m. they came to know that five persons along with Nazrul had been kidnapped away. Knowing about the occurrence, they came near the stadium to see 04/05 persons at work. On asking, said persons disclosed that with two numberplateless microbuses, 15/16 RAB personnel kidnapped away 5/6 persons. Thereafter, he came to know that Advocate Chandan Sarker along with his driver was also kidnapped away by the RAB personnel. After ‘Asr’ prayer they went to the local member of the parliament (MP). The Local MP made telephone call at different places in respect of Nazrul and assured him that Nazrul would be recovered alive. Therefater, hearing missing news of Nazrul, some people created blockade at the Link Road and some people surrounded Kalibazar office of RAB-11. On 27.04.2014 Tarek Syeed of RAB made phone call to the MP whereon the respected MP asked them to go to the RAB office with their relatives saying that Nazrul was there. Therefater, on 27.04.2014 at about 08.30 p.m. he along with his daughter, the father-in-law of his daughter and others went to RAB office at Adamjee. At the gate, their mobile phones were kept and they were taken to the C.O. Tarek Syeed who made query about their names and addresses and asked as to why they encircled the RAB office. Then they replied that five persons along with Nazrul had been kidnapped away and that was why they encircled the office. Tarek Syeed asked about

In his cross this witness stated that he was the Chairman of Siddhirganj Union Parishad. He had good relation with deceased Nazrul. He made statement to the Investigating Officer more than once. He narrated the occurrence to the Investigating Officer. He saw the dead body of Nazrul to be tied up with rope. Four persons said that the RAB personnel dragged the victims into two microbuses and kidnapped them away. The four labourers told him about two numberless microbuses and about the kidnapping. The RAB personnel were in plain dress and gave their identity as RAB personnel. He cannot say the names of the four labourers. The RAB personnel who were involved in the occurrence made confessional statements admitting their guilt. He made statement to the Investigating Officer. He could not recollect as to how many days after the occurrence he made statement to the Investigating Officer. This witness denied the defence-suggestions that the accused Noor Hossain did not pay money to the accused Tarek Syeed or that his daughter i.e. the informant filed the case falsely against the accused-persons or that the accused-persons ASI Kamal Hossain, Constable Habibur Rahman Habib and SI Bazlur Rahman were not present at the place of occurrence at the time of occurrence.

 The P.W.14 Md. Sahahjahan deposed that

the date of occurrence was 27.04.2014. He saw

in the media that five persons along with Nazrul were kidnapped. Three days after that

he saw in the media that the dead bodies of Nazrul and others were found. He along with Nazrul Islam, Swapan, Liton and others came

to the Court to give hazira(attendance).     After hazira, Nazrul went to Dhaka by the car

of Swapan. He along with three others went to their residence at 2.00 p.m. He came to know about the occurrence on TV. Police examined

him about the occurrence.

The defence declined to cross examine this witness.

The P.W.15 Md. Abu Hanif deposed that he held Inquest on the dead body of the deceased-victims  and  prepared Inquest Report and seized the recovered alamats.

In his cross this witness stated that during preparation of the Inquest Reports no witness told him about the cause of death.

The P.W.16 Md. Abdul Quddus stated in his evidence that on 30.04.2014 he was attached to Bandar P.S. As per G.D.E. No.1154 dated 30.04.2014 he went to Chardhaleswari area on the bank of river Shitalakshmya with S.I. Belayet. Going there, he saw dead bodies floating in the river. With the assistance of the local people the dead bodies were lifted up. His authority held Inquest on the dead body of the deceased. He took the dead bodies to the morgue of Narayanganj Hospital for autopsy. Subsequently, he heard about the names of the dead persons. This witness proved his signatures in the Forms in respect of the dead bodies and also proved his signatures in the Inquest Reports as Exhibits-38(1), 40(1), 14(2),21(2), 15(2),27(2), and 19(2. This witness further deposed that there were sacks tied up with rope with the dead bodies which were seized under Seizure Lists.

In his cross this witness stated that he only carried the dead bodies.

The P.W.17 Advocate Priyatam Kumar Deb deposed that the occurrence took place on 27.04.2014 at about 1.30 p.m. at Dhaka- Narayanganj Link Road situated adjacent to Khan Osman Ali Stadium. His uncle, the victim Chandan Kumar Sarker along with his driver was kidnapped away while they were returning home. The kidnappers kidnapped them in the name of RAB. On the date of occurrence Advocate Panna lodged a G.D.E. They went to the Police Station, RAB office and S.P. office in search of the said victims but failed to trace out their whereabouts. Hearing news about recovery of the dead bodies from the river Shitalakshmya, he went there and signed the Inquest report. He

received the dead body of his deceased uncle after Post Mortem examination. Through media, newspapers and from the confessional statements of the accused-persons, he got confirmed that the RAB personnel conjointly with Noor Hossain Kidanapped away the victim Nazrul with the financial assistance of Noor Hossain. As his uncle protested the act of kidnapping, his uncle and all others were killed.

In his cross this witness stated that he based his statement on the basis of the news he got from media.

The P.W.18 Md. Abu Taher deposed that the occurrence took place on 27.04.2014 at 1.00/1.30 p.m. near Fatulla Stadium. On the date and at the time of occurrence seven persons including Nazrul were kidnapped. Knowing about the occurrence he made phone call to Tajul and found his phone switched off. He then made contact with Abul Khair, the father of Tajul who told him that Shahid Chairman along with others were searching for the kidnapped persons. On 30.04.2014 at 03.00/03.30 p.m. through TV he came to know that in the Shitalakshmya river at Kolagachhia Union under Bandar P.S. some dead bodies floated up. They went to the place to see that one dead body had already been lifted up from the river. He identified the dead body of his nephew Tajul. He saw that entrails had come out of the dead body of his nephew Tajul. Police held Inquest on the dead body of the deceased. Police seized sacks and wearing apparels under a Seizure List. This witness proved his signatures in the Inquest Report and in the Seizure List as Exhibits- 26(2) and 28(2). This witness further deposed that with regard to construction of a road, an altercation took place between Mobarak, maternal uncle’s son of Noor Hossain and the victim Nazrul prior to the alleged

occurrence. At one stage, Mobarak made phone call to Noor Hossain. Thereafter, 60/70 persons came to assault Nazrul. Having not found Nazrul, those persons dismantled shop of Nazrul. On the following day the accused- persons Noor Hossain, Yasin, and Majibar with their associates came to Siddhirganj  in front of the house of Mobarak. Mohammad Ali, son of Mobarak filed a case of mugging against Nazrul and 14 others. The date for hazira in that case was fixed on 27.04.2014. After giving hazira while Nazrul and others were returning, seven persons including Nazrul were kidnapped away from near the stadium. On 30.04.2014 he came to know that the dead bodies of the kidnapped persons floated up in the river Shitalakshmya. Subsequently, he came to know that in exchange of money the accused Noor Hossain got Nazrul and others killed by RAB personnel Tarek Syeed and others.

In his cross this witness stated that he identified the dead body of Tajul seeing pant, belt and face. He was present at the time of occurrence of first February. From different media he came to know that by paying money to the RAB personnel, the accused Noor Hossain got the occurrence perpetrated by RAB personnel. This witness denied the defence-suggestions that the accused Noor Hossain did not cause to happen the occurrence by RAB personnel paying them money.

The P.W.19 Md. Saiful Islam deposed that the victim deceased Nazrul was the husband of his elder sister. The occurrence took place on 27.04.2014 at about 1.30 p.m. On 01.02.2014, an altercation regarding construction of a road took place between Nazrul and Mobarak. Therefaterr, Mobarak made phone call to Noor Hossain Chairman. Noor Hossain Chairman came accompanied by many people with 10/12 vehicles. They dismantled the Honda motorcycle of his younger brother at Siddhirganj. Noor Hossain Chairman dismantled whatever he found. Being the complainant, Mobarak filed a case against Nazrul and others. On 27.04.2014, Nazrul and others came to Narayanganj for giving hazira in the Court. On their way back after giving hazira, Nazrul and others were kidnapped away by the RAB personnel. They searched for Nazrul. He along with his elder sister and others went to the Narayanganj Puran Court Office of RAB wherefrom they came back to Narayanganj Link Road.  They protested against the act of kidnapping. On 30.04.2014 at about 2.00/2.30 they got news to the effect that some dead bodies floated up in the river. Having received the news, he along with his sister and relatives went to the Narayanganj Launch Ghat and went to the place where the dead bodies floated up and found

In his cross this witness stated that he could not recollect as to how many days after the occurrence he made statement to police. At the time of occurrence on 01.02.2014 he was near the place of occurrence. This witness denied the defence-suggestion that he deposed falsely. 

The P.W.20 S.I. Abu Taleb stated in his deposition that on 30.04.2014 he held Inquest on the dead body of an unknown person (45) and prepared Inquest Report and sent the dead body for autopsy to Narayanganj Victoria Hospital through constable Abdul Quddus. This witness proved the Inquest Report as Exhibit- 33 and his signature therein as Exhibit-33(1)

and also proved the Chalan. This witness further deposed that on 01.05.2014 he held Inquest on the dead body of an unknown person (42) and prepared Inquest Report and sent the dead body through constable Abdul Quddus for autopsy to Narayanganj Victoria General Hospital. This witness proved the Inquest Report as Exhibit-34 and his signature therein as Exhibit-34(1) and his signature in the Chalan as Exhibit-32(2). This witness also deposed that he seized alamats viz. plastic sacks, 10 birck which were tied up with the back of the dead body under a Seizure List. This witness proved the Seizure List as Exhibit-37 and his signature therein as Exhibit-37(1). This witness further deposed that he seized alamats viz. a portion of a lungi and a torn out ‘Sando’ banyan of an unknown deceased person (45) under a Seizure List. This witness proved the Seizure List as Exhibit-38 and his signature therein as Exhibit-38(1). This witness further deposed that on 01.05.2014 he seized alamats of an unknown person (42) under a Seizure List. This witness proved the Seizure List and his signature therein as Exhibit-39 and 39(1). This witness further deposed that he seized the torn out wearing apparel of another dead body as produced by the constable Abdul Quddus under a Seizure List. This witness proved the Seizure List as Exhibit-40 and his signature therein as Exhibit-40(1). This witness identified the seized alamats as Material Exhibits-IV series.

In his cross this witness stated that he did not mention about the first occurrence in the Inquest Report. In the 2nd Inquest Report there was no description of the occurrence.

The P.W.21 Md. Rafiqul Islam, the elder brother of the victim-deceased Sirajul Islam Liton deposed that he identified the dead body of the deceased Siraj in Victoria General hospital and received the dead body. He made statement to police.

The defence declined to cross examine this witness.

The P.W.22 Fakirchan deposed that two years back he attested two Seizure Lists in respect of recovery of brick, rope and cloth and attested the Inquest Report. This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit-39(2) and the Inquest Report as Exhibit-34(2).

In his cross this witness stated that he could not say as to what was written in the Seizure List.

The P.W.23 Ibrahim deposed that he was a resident of Shantinagar under Bandar P.S. About two years back he went to the place where the dead bodies were recovered. He saw police to lift up one dead body. He attested the Inquest Report and the Seizure List. This witness proved his signature in the Inquest Report and the Seizure List as Exhibits-33(2) and 37(2). He further deposed that amongst the seized articles he saw that sacks with brick tied up with rope.

In his cross this witness stated that at the instruction of police, he put his signatures.

The P.W.24 Ibne Hasan deposed that he was an inhabitant of Chuladhara village under Bandar P.S., Narayanganj. The occurrence took place two years back. Hearing news in the television, he went to the bank of the river of the place of occurrence to see gathering of many people. Police brought up the dead bodies from the river. Police held Inquest on the dead body of the dead body. This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List (Exhibit-33) as Exhibit-33(3). This witness further deposed that police recovered dead body tied up with brick and rope. This witness also proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit-37(3).

In his cross this witness stated that he could not recollect as to whether the two papers in which he put his signatures were read over to him or not.

The P.W.25 Hazi Md. Abdul Salam deposed that he was the full younger brother of the victim Nzrul. On 27.04.2014 his brother came to Narayanganj Court to give hazira. At the time of giving hazira, the RAB personel in civil dress tried to kidnap him. One of them was apprehended by public and handed him over to police and he admitted himself to be a member of RAB. He came to know about it over phone from his brother Nazrul. After hazira, at about 01.30 p.m., his brother and four others started for Dhaka with the white coulour private car of Swapan. He was waiting for his brother in his residence at Jatrabari. At about 1.36 p.m. he made a phone call to his brother and found the phone to be switched off. Thereafter, he made phone call to Swapan and Liton but this time also he found their mobile phones to be switched off. Thereafter, he rushed to the SP Office from his residence. The wife of his brother also told him over phone that she found the mobile phone of his brother to be switched off. They went to the SP Office at 08.00 p.m. and told everything to the SP. SP took information about his brother and asked them to go to the RAB Office. The wife of his brother and others went to Adamjee RAB office and he along with others went to Kalibazar RAB Office. After going to the RAB Office they asked whether RAB personl brought his brother apprehending to which they answered in the negative.

Thereafter, they came on to the road. The people near the stadium disclosed that at 01.30/01.45 p.m. by there vehicles, the RAB personnel picked up five persons (Nazrul, Swapan, Liton, Taijul and driver Zahangir) along with his brother. A person saw the act of kidnapping by RAB personnel and saw, the RAB personnel to pick up another person as well. He also came to know that said person was Chandan Advocate. His Bhabi (wife of his brother) went to the MP. Three days after the occurrence the dead bodies were found on the bank of the river Kalagachhia under Bandar P.S. They instantly went to the place of recovery of the dead bodies. On 28.04.2014 his Bhabi lodged FIR with the Fatulla P.S. He identified the dead body of Nazrul. Police held Inquest on the dead body of Nazrul as per his identification. This witness proved the Inquest Report (Exhibit-2)and his signature therein as Exhibit-2(2). This witness further deposed that the dead body was tied up with rope with sack containg 10 brick each and the abdomen was perforated.

This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit-13(2). This witness further deposed that the dead body was taken to Victoria Hospital. He accompanied the dead body. After post motrtem examination on the dead body, he received it. He proved the Receipt in respect of receiving the dead body and his signature in the Receipt as Exhibits- 42 and 42(1). This witness further deposed that two months before the date of occurrence, in the event of not breaking the shutter of a shop, his brother Nazrul paid him Tk.10, 000/00 to break the shutter. Instead of breaking the shutter, Mobarak informed the matter to Noor Hossain whereon Noor Hossain sent 60/70 persons there who beat up people and dismantled shops. On that night, Noor Hoosain got filed a case against Nazrul. Getiing bail in that case Nazrul came to the Court to give hazira. On 02.2014 Noor Hossain came to Mizmizi Chowdhury Para and compensated the injured people saying that they came to kill Nazrul and having not found him, beat up them and that wherever they would find Nazrul they would kill him. It was propagated that Nazrul was kidnapped away by RAB personnel. With conspiracy with Noor Hossaain, the RAB personnel Major Arif, Rana, Syeed and others kidnapped away Nazrul and others. This witness identified the accused- persons Noor Hossain, Rana, Syeed, Arif, Shahjahan, Churchil and Ali Ahmad in the dock who kidnapped away Nazrul and others who were known to him.

 In his cross this witness stated that he was present at the time of lodging the FIR. From inside the Court, the RAB personnel made attempt to kidnap his brother. He did not know the accused Purnendu Bala but mentioned in the FIR to be the members of RAB. In the FIR there is no mention of the accused Arif Hossain but there was mention of RAB force. He made statement to police on 03.05.2014. At first he came to know about the kidnapping from the people on the road. This witness denied the defence-suggestions that under the leadership of the accused Tarek Syeed the occurrence did not take place or that the accused Noor Hossain was not involved in the occurrence or that the accused-persons Mokhlesur Rahman, Abdul Alim, Mohiuddin Munshi, Hira Miah, Md. Ruhul Amin, Jamal Uddin, Shahjahan, Asaduzzaman Khan Noor, Babul Hasan, Churchil, Ali Mohammad, Raham Ali and Commander Masood Rana were not involved in the alleged occurrence.

The P.W.26 Advocate Arunava Sarker deposed that the victim Chandan Kumar Sarker was his full uncle. The occurrence took place on 27.04.2014 at about 2.00 p.m. After finishing his Court-work, while his uncle was returning home by his private car, he was kidnapped from the road in front of Osman Stadium. At 05.00/05.30 p.m. he came to know from his nephew Dipu that his uncle did not return home. While he gave mobile call to the mobile phone of Chandan Sarker bearing no. 01716436688 it rang but none attended it. Thereafter, he along with his Advocate friend Momen went up to Jalkuri by a CNG and asked people found on the way as to whether any accident took place on the road or any body was kidnapped to which they replied that they did not know anything. Thereafter, he came back to his chamber and made attempt time and again to make mobile contact. At about 7.00/7.30 p.m., a client came to his chamber and informed that Commissioner Nazrul was kidnapped while he was returning from the Court after giving hazira from the road of Osman Stadium. On his query, his client gave description of Nazrul. Then he could recollect that the car of Nazrul and Chandan Sarker were parked side by side in the

was found at Niketon, Gulshan. S.P. Narayanganj assured about the recovery of the private car. In his cross this witness stated that in his G.D.E., he implicated none.          

The P.W.27 Md. Alamgir Hossain deposed that the deceased Jahangir was his brother

who used to drive the car of the deceased Swapan. He identified the dead body of his brother in Victoria Hospital and received the dead body for burial. This witness proved the Deed of Receipt as the Exhibit-43 and his signature therein as Exhibit-43(1). This witness further deposed that he attested the Seizure List in respect of Jeans Pant, Belt and short (jangia). He made statement to police. On 27.04.2014 at 1.30 p.m. Shahabuddin over phone told him that the mobile phone of Jahangir was found to be switched off. They searched for Jahangir. Thereafter, news was received to the effect that the dead bodies were found in the river Shitalaksmya. On the following day he came to Victoria Hospital and identified his brother’s dead body. Subsequently, he came to know that RAB personnel tied up brick with the back and chest of his brother and that by kidnapping away they killed his brother and dropped his dead body in the river.

 This witness denied the denied the defence-suggestion that he did not tell the Investigating Officer that RAB kidnapped his brother.

The P.W.28 A.S.I. Riyazul Haque deposed that on 27.04.2014 while he was on duty at dusk, found a white colour numberless private car in abandoned condition at a place 200 yards away on the road from Gazipur Chowrasta (crossing). With the instruction of higher authority he seized the car under a Seizure List and took it to his custody. This witness proved the Seizure List as Exhibit-44 and his signature therein as Exhibit-44(1). This witness further deposed that thereafter, finding some papers he included them in the Seizure List. This witness identified the Money Bag, National ID Card, Driving Licence etc. as Material Exhibits-V, V (I)-V(III) series. This witness further deposed that thereafter, he sent the car to the Investigating Officer of Fatulla P.S. Case No.74 (4)14.

The defence declined to cross examine this witness.

The P.W.29 Md. Badrul Alam deposed that on 27.04.2014 at 08.30 p.m. while he along with A.S.I. Riyazul Haque was on duty at Rajendrapur Chowrastha they found a car in abandoned condition. ASI Riyazul Haque seized the car under a Seizure List. He attested the Seizure List. This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit- 44(2). This witness further deposed that Money Bag, Papers. Voter ID Card etc. were seized under the Seizure List. This witness identified the seized articles.

 This witness was not cross examined on behalf of the accused-persons.

The P.W.30 Md. Mokter Hossain deposed that He attested the Seizure List dated 27.04.2014. This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit-44(3).

Defence declined to cross examine this witness.

The P.W.31 Anwar Hossain stated in his deposition that he attested the Seizure List dated 27.04.2014. The seized articles were there in the Court. This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit- 44(4).

The defence declined to cross examine this witness.  

The P.W.32 Constable No. 11696 Md. Salim Mia deposed that on 28.04.2014 at 11.30 p.m. while he was on duty with S.I. Mizanur Rahman

at Niketon area, they found a black colour private car bearing no. Dahaka-Metro Ga-2733- 37 (G Corolla) in abandoned condition. Thereafter, S.I. Wahiduzzaman of Fatulla P.S. seized the car under a Seizure List. He proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit-45(1).

The P.W.33 Inspector Wahiduzzaman deposed that on 28.04.20014 he was attached to Fatulla P.S. On receiving information to the effect that a black colour car bearing no. Dahaka Metro-Ga-173377 was found in abandoned condition at plot no. 18 of Nikaton Housing under Gulshan P.S., he went there with his force, seized it under a Seizure List in presence of witnesses under a Seizure List in connection with Fatulla P.S. case No. 74 dated 28.08.2014 under sections 170/341/365/34 of the Penal Code at 11.50 p.m. and took the car to his custody. This witness proved the Seizure List as Exhibit-45 and his signature therein as Exhibit-45(2).

In his cross this witness stated that at the time of occurrence he was attached to Fatulla P.S.

The P.W.34 Morsheda Akter, the wife of the deceased Maniruzzaman stated in her deposition that the occurrence took place on 27.04.2014. On that date her husband went to Narayanganj with Chairman Nazrul to give hazira. After giving hazira at about 1.00 p.m. she made telephone call to her husband but found his mobile phone to be switched off. She made phone call to Ismail who told her that her husband was not there in the Court and that he went away. Thereafter, she made call to her husband’s brother Mizanur Rahman Ripon who told her that he went away. Subsequently, Ripon informed her over phone that from near the stadium, RAB took away her husband and others. Thereafter, on search, her husband was not found. On 27.04.2014 seeing TV news, the local people disclosed that her husband and others had been kidnapped away by RAB. Thereafter, on 30.07.2014 through TV she came to know that six dead bodies including that of her husband were found in the river Shitalakshmya. Mizanur Rahman Ripon went there and found the dead body of her husband. She became senseless. After 30.04.1974, the dead body of another person was found. With the permission of the Court, she accepted the private car of her husband by a Deed of Undertaking. This witness probed the Deed of Undertaking as Exhibit-46 and her signature therein as Exhibit-46(1). This witness further deposed that through newspaper she came to know that her husband was killed mercilessly. Fifteen days before the occurrence, her husband told her that Noor Hossain filed false case against him. Her husband could not stay at

his residence as the associates of Noor Hossain used to chase him. As per the pre- planning of the accused Noor Hossain the occurrence took place. She saw her husband always thoughtful about Noor Hossain. Excepting Noor Hossain, her husband had no other enemy. She was 100% sure that Noor Hossain got the occurrence perpetrated.

In her cross this witness stated that she made statement to the I.O. This witness denied the defence-suggestions that her husband was not kidnapped away or that she did not tell the Investigating Officer that by chalking out plan Noor Hossain killed her husband or that her husband had no enmity with Noor Hossain or that she did not get news from the TV that RAB kidnapped away her husband or that she deposed falsely.

The P.W.35 Archana Sarker, the wife of the deceased Chandan Sarker deposed that the occurrence took place on 27.04.2014. On that day at about 1.30/2.00 p.m. finshiong his works of the Court her husband was returning home with his private car bearing no.Dhaka Metro-Ga-2733-37. She received the car of her husband from the Court on 30.06.2014. This witness proved the Deed of Custody in respect of the car as Exhibit-27 and her signature therein as Exhibit-27(1).

This witness sought justice for killing of her husband. This witness was not cross examined on behalf of the defence.

The P.W.36 Madhab Kumar Deb stated in his deposition that the deceased Chandan Kumar was his distant maternal uncle. The Occurrence took place on 27.04.2014. On 30.04.2014 he identified the dead body of Chandan Kumar at Chardhaleswari. He attested the Seizure List in respect of brick, rope, sack, belt, pant etc. This witness proved his signature in the Seizure List as Exhibit-14 and his signature therein as Exhibit-14(3).

The defence declined to cross examine this witness.

The P.W.37 Dr. Md. Asaduzzaman deposed that on 30.04.2014 at 5.30 p.m. he held Post Mortem examination on the dead body of Hazi Nazrul Islam (37) through a Medical Board in Narayanganj General Hospital. The board consisted of three members. The other members were Dr. Jalil Ahmed and Dr. Sheikh Farid. During post mortem examination they found the following injuries on the person of the deceased Hazi Nazrul Islam:

1. Continuous horizontal ligature mark around lower part of neck.
2. Extensive echymosis on the occipital and Posterior parietal region of head.
3. Echymosis on the both sides of

upper chest.

4. Echymosis on the right and left thigh.

5. Penetrated wound on the abdominal wall, just right to the umbilicus 1½(inch) in diameter.

Besides above, they examined the internal organs and found larynx and esophagus highly congested and that the right and left lung partially decomposed and highly congested.

In their opinion death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation preceded by assault which was ante-mortem and homicidal in nature. 

This witness proved the Post Mortem Examination Report as Exhibit-47 and his signature therein as Exhibit47/1. This witness further deposed that the signature of Dr. Jalil and Dr. Sheikh Farid were known to him. This witness proved their signatures as Exhibit-47(2) and Exhibit-47(3). This witness further deposed the Civil Surgeon, Narayanganj countersigned the Post Mortem Examination Report on 07.05.2014. His signature was known to him. This witness proved the signature of the Civil Surgeon, Narayanganj in the Post Mortem Examination Report (Exhibit-47) as Exhibit-47(4).

This witness further deposed that on 30.04.2014 he along with their board members held Post Mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Chandan Kumar Sarker (60) in Narayanganj General Hospital. The other members of the board were Dr. Jalil Ahmed and Dr. Sheikh Farid. At 10.00 p.m. they held Post Mortem examination. During Post Mortem examination they found the following injuries on the person of the deceased:

1. Continuous horizontal ligature mark around lower part of neck.
2. Echymosis on left temporal occipital and part of frontal region.
3. Echymosis on left upper chest.

4. Penetrated wound on the abdominal wall, just left lateral to umbilicus 1½(inch) in diameter.

They found the larynx and esophagus highly congested and found the right and left lung partially decomposed and highly congested.

In their opinion death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation preceded by assault which was ante-mortem and homicidal in nature.

This witness proved the Post Mortem Examination Report as Exhibit-28 and his signatures therein as Exhibit-28(1). This witness proved the signatures of other members of the board therein as Exhibits- 28(2), 28(3) and the signatures of Civil Surgeon (Dulal Chandra Chowdhury) as Exhibit- 28(4).

This witness further deposed that on 30.04.2014 they held Post Mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Ibrahim (48) in Narayanganj Zilla Sadar Hospital at 10.10 p.m. During post mortem examination they found the following injuries on the person of the deceased: 

1. Continuous horizontal ligature mark around lower part of neck.
2. Echymosis on left parietal region and whole occipital region.
3. Echymosis on left upper chest wall.
4. Penetrated wound on the abdominal wall just left lateral to umbilicus 1½(inch) in diameter with protruded intestine.

During examination of the different organs of the dead body they found larynx and esophagus highly congested and that the right and left lung partially decomposed and highly congested.

In their opinion death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation preceded by assault which was ante-mortem and homicidal in nature.

This witness proved the Post Mortem Examination Report as Exhibit-29 and his signature therein as Exhibit-29(1) and the signatures of Dr. Jalil Ahmed and Dr. Sheikh Farid and Civil Surgeon Dr. Dulal Chandra Chowdhury therein as Exhibits-29(2), 29(3) and 29(4)

This witness further deposed that on 30.04.2014 at 11.00 p.m. they held Post Mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Moniruzzaman Swapan (40) through a medical board. During post mortem examination they found the following injuries on the person of the deceased:

1. Continuous horizontal ligature mark around lower part of neck.
2. Echymosis on upper chest wall.
3. Echymosis on occipital region.

4. Penetrated wound on the abdominal wall  just above the umbilicus 1½(inch) in diameter with protruded intestine.

During examination of the internal organ they found larynx and esophagus highly congested and that the right and left lung partially decomposed and highly congested.

In their opinion death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation preceded by assault which was ante-mortem and homicidal in nature.

This witness proved the Post Mortem Examination Report as Exhibit-48, his signature therein as Exhibit-48(1) and the signatures of Dr. Jalil Ahmed and Dr. Sheikh Farid and the Civil Surgeon Dr. Dulal Chandra Chowdhury therein as Exhibit-48(2), 48(3) and 48(4).

 This witness further deposed that on 30.04.2014 at about 10.40 p.m. they held Post Mortem Examination on the dead body of the deceased victim Tajul Islam (25). During Post Mortem examination they found the following injuries on the person of the deceased:

1. Continuous horizontal ligature mark around lower part of neck.
2. Echymosis on upper chest wall.
3. Echymosis on frontal both partial temporal and occipital region of brain.
4. Penetrated wound on the abdominal wall just left lateral to umbilicus 1½(inch) in diameter with protruded intestine.

During post mortem examination of the internal organ of the deceased they found larynx and esophagus highly congested and that the right and left lung partially decomposed and highly congested.

In their opinion death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation preceded by assault which was ante-mortem and homicidal in nature.

This witness proved the Post Mortem Examination Report as Exhibit-49, his signature therein as Exhibit-49 (1) and the signatures of his accompanying doctors and the Civil Surgeon Dr. Dulal Chandra Chowdhury therein as Exhibits-49 (2), 49 (3) and 49(4).

This witness further deposed that on 30.04.2014 at 11.15 p.m. through a Board they held post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Md. Jahangir Hossain (28). During examination they found the following injuries on the person of the deceased:

1. Continuous horizontal ligature mark around lower part of neck.
2. Echymosis on upper chest wall.
3. Echymosis on parietal and occipital region.
4. Two penetrated wounds on the abdominal wall just left side of umbilicus 1½(inch) in diameter each with protruded intestine.

During examination of the internal organ they found larynx and esophagus highly congested and that the right and left lung partially decomposed and highly congested.

In their opinion death was due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation preceded by assault which was ante-mortem and homicidal in nature.

This witness proved the Post Mortem Examination Report as Exhibit-50, his signature therein as Exhibits-50 (1) and of the two doctors of his Board and the Civil Surgeon Dr. Dulal Chandra Chowdhury therein as Exhibit-50 (2), 50 (3) and 50 (4).