Saturday, July 14, 2012

13 Jun 2012: Sayedee IO cross exam day 22

Adjournment application
Abdur Razzak, defence counsel sought to adjourn proceedings relating to Sayedee until 25th June. He said that their chief trial counsel Mizanul Islam was not well and needed to rest, adding that on 24th June the trial of Professor Golam Azam is due to start and Mizanul Islam will be conducting the trial of that case and he needs time for preparation.

The chairman said that the defence could get the assistance of other lawyers; it is up to the defence party, whom they choose to be their lawyer.

Razzak also said that they also need some rest, with the chairman responding that the judge have no rest, and the tribunal must proceed.

The chairman said that they would accept any plea except ones for adjournment.

Abdur Razzak, said that If you can accept out applications why not one for adjournment.

The chairman said that, ‘Not in our hands.’

Books for Azam
The chairman then asked the prosecutor Mr. Malum about whether the jail authority was complying with the order relating to books for Gholam Azam. He asked him whether he had any discussion with the Jail Authority?

Zead Al Malum said that the accused has given a list of his desired books to the Jail authority. After getting their list of books in our hands, it will then be sent to the District Magistrate.

Justice Nizamul Huq asked by following which law was the list sent to the District Magistrate?

Zead Al Malum said that by following Rule 1074 of the Jail Code.

Justice Nizamul Huq: The order has been passed about supplying some specific books, not more than that. You can say it in clear terms that there is no order to supply books other than those which is contained in the desired list of the petitioner.

He then said that the list should go to the superintendent under Rule-654; not to the District Magistrate. The order is only about supplying the books mentioned in the order. We have stated in simple terms to supply 4 kinds of books.

Everybody to whom the order has been passed must obey the order. We didn’t mention the names of the authors for those books. Now, the jail authority may ask for clarification to supply those. But without doing that, after getting an order from this Tribunal; they have sent it to the District Magistrate.

Zead Al Malum said that the printing materials must be certainly checked out and that he had sent it to the magistrates just because of some suspicions.

Tajul Islam then said, after passing the order on 13th and our learned friend is submitting his arguments like this. The rule of the Jail Code that he has submitted is that if books exceed 5 in number, the permission of the District Magistrate is required. They are not complying with the order of this tribunal and thus hereby presenting some misleading arguments. They are thereby disobeying the orders of the tribunal. They are challenging the supremacy of the Tribunal.

Justice Nizamul Huq passed the following order (Summary)
On 13-5-2012 upon the prayer of the accused petitioner Gholam Azam; this tribunal has directed the Prison Authority to supply him the Holy Quran, Tafsir, Hadis, and Biography of Hazrat Muhammad Sallalllahu Alaihis Salam (PBUH).

Mr. Tajul Islam appearing on behalf of the accused has submitted that the said books have not been supplied to the accused; as such the Prison Authority has violated the order of the Tribunal. We have asked Prosecutor Zead Al Malum to consult with the prison authority about the position of the matter. He has submitted that the Jail authority upon receiving the order has sent the matter to the District Magistrate; under Rule- 1074 of the Jail Code.

Upon perusal of the order and hearing both the parties we are of the view that if the Jail authority has any doubt about the order they could ask for a clarification from the tribunal. The Jail authority ought to supply the books to the accused. If any doubt is being created they might ask.

One month is going to be passed. It is noticed that the order has not been complied with. We again direct the Jail authority to supply the books within two days of transferring the order, thereby complying with the court’s order.
Zead Al-Malum asked the tribunal to please mention the names of the books in the order.

Tajul Islam said that they will provide the list at 2 P.M.

Cross examination of Sayedee Investigation officer, day
The cross examination of Helal Uddin the Investigation Officer, by the defence lawyer Mizanul Islam then continued. This followed on from the previous day
Defence: To get the information about Mr. Delwar Hossain Syedee you have sent letters to the 5 authorities in the memo no- 352 through the Chief Coordinator of the Investigation Unit Mr. Abdul Hannan Khan on 10-4-2011.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: On 10-4-2011 Mr. Abdul Hannan Khan has sent letters to the following authorities namely- 1) Police Super, Pirojpur 2) D.C. Motijheel, DMP, Dhaka 3) SS Metro, CID Bangladesh 4) SS City, SB, Bangladesh 5) DC-DB- Dhaka.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: The letter was served to ask for a report for the status of the accused before 1971 and any remarkable change, if any after the liberation war and his position after the 16th December, 1971.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Mr. Moniruzzaman, Additional Police Commissioner, Detective and the Crimes Information Unit, South, DMP has sent a report on 18-4-2011.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: The report contains the name of the accused father as Mawlana Yousuf Sayedee.
Witness: Yes.

Defence: The 3rd Para states the economic status and afterward states that information might be collected from his (accused) place of birth and the Parerhat Union.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: On 21-4-2011; SB Police Super- Mr. Moniruzzaman has forwarded the memo no- 360 of 21-4-2011 towards the Senior Assistant Police Super- Akramul Hossain; to send it to the Chief Coordinator of the Investigation Unit Mr. Abdul Hannan Khan.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: It has been mentioned that before 1971 he has involved in giving Tafsir [Islamic Statements.]

Witness: Yes.

Defence: It has not been mentioned there that Mr. Sayedee was involved with the activities which are against the liberation war movement.

Witness: Whether Mr. Syedee was involved with the activities which are against the spirit of Liberation war movement, this question was not asked for. So there is no statement regarding this matter in the report.

Defence: Whether there is any line in the report about the position and the profession of the following accused at 1971

Witness: Yes.

Defence: There is no information about his involvement with the “Pach Tohobil” in 1971.

Witness: No. There is not.

Defence: Whether Mr. Sayedee’s present address is situated under the arena of the DMP, Motijheel Police Station.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: The report of Mr. Tofajjol Hossain, acting Personnel of Motijheel Police Station which was made on 30-4-2011 was sent to the Sub Police Commissioner, Motijheel Division, Dhaka- Mr. Anwar Hossain. On 2-5-2011 he has forwarded the report to the Police Commissionr, DMP. On- 8-5-2011; the Joint Police Commissioner- Mr. Md. Ibrahim Hatim, PPM has forwarded the report to the Chief Coordinator of the Investigation Unit Mr. Abdul Hannan Khan.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: The first serial of the report contains the names and the addresses.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: It states the last portion of the name of the accused and his father as “Sayedee”, not “Sikdar”.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Please have a look at serial-4; it states that from the time of his birth, he has stayed at Southkhali of Pirojpur District till 1974. He has stayed at Khulna till 1975 to 1980 and on 1975- being arrested at Kotoali Police Station of Khulna he was being detained.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: The line of his being arrest states that he has been detained under the Special Powers Act.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: On 29-4-2011, Mr. Lutfor Rahman, CID has sent a report without expressing anything about his position at 1971. It has been mentioned in the report that the authority of the Police Station of Indurkani, Pirojpur District might provide some information regarding the matter.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: On 9-5-2011 Mr. Mahbub Hossain, PPM, Additional IGP on behalf of IG, special branch, Dhaka has sent a report to the Chief Coordinator of the Investigation Unit Mr. Abdul Hannan Khan. And the report was sent to you.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Look at the serial-8, it states that he was giving Tafsir [Islamic Statements] at various places.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Though the report states about his position and profession in 1971 but does not states about his involvement with either the “Pach Tohobil” or any activities against the liberation war movement.

Witness: The report was not asked to be provided with these matters.

Defence: 5 Police officer have assisted preparing this report from the field level. Were any of them made any witnesses?

Witness: No.

Defence: Till the formation of the Police force a special fortnightly report was being forwarded to the Government.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: During the liberation war; the Pirojpur Mohokuma was situated under which special Division of the Police force?

Witness: Bakergonj Division.

Defence: Whether you have collected the special fortnightly report of the then Bakergonj Police District which especially comprises the report about Pirojpur Mohokuma.

Witness: No. I have contacted the Pirojpur Police Super; and didn’t find any information.

Defence: Whether you have forwarded any letter to the Pirojpur Police Super regarding the matter?

Witness: No.

Defence: Whether there is any information regarding your visit to the Pirojpur Police Superintendent regarding the matter.

Witness: I didn’t go there specifically for this purpose but to the purpose of overall investigation.

Defence: When did you go to the Pirojpur Police Super?

Witness: On 18-09-2011; at 9: 40 A.M.

Defence: The Special branch is being operated by the DI-1 [District Inspector-1]?

Witness: Yes.

Defence: Whether you have gone to the office of the DI-1 of Pirojpur?

Witness: No.

Defence: When you have gone to the Police Superintendent of Pirojpur; then on that day- who was in charge of the DI-1?

Witness: I don’t know.

Defence: When did the Pirojpur Mohokuma get separated from the Bakergonj; can you say.

Witness: No.

Defence: There is no information about the destruction of the fortnightly reports of Pirojpur.

Witness: No.

Defence: You haven;t produce the reports intentionally, because if you would have produced those- there was a chance to come out that Mr. Sayedee’s not involved with any kind of following activities.

Witness: Not true.

Defence: You didn’t make as witnesses the Police Officers at the field levels who have assisted preparing the following 5 reports- because in that case, there was a chance that it would come out that Mr. Syedee’s not involved with any kind of following activities.

Witness: Not true.

Defence: You have used the official movie camera and still camera for preparing the material exhibit no- 12 and 13.

Witness: Yes.

Defence: How many cameras have been used?

Witness: 1 movie camera and 1 still camera.

Defence: The photographs which have been attached here under the material exhibits have been captured within the period after the investigation starts and the investigation ends off.

Witness: Yes.


No comments:

Post a Comment