Sunday, April 19, 2015

Salah Uddin habeas writ - response to government


This is the reply to the High Court by the lawyers to the acting for Hasina Ahmed to the response of the Attorney General concerning the alleged abduction by the state of Salah Uddin Ahmed, BNP leader, on 10 March, the subject of a writ of habeas corpus.

(Please note that some small grammatical corrections have been made to help with comprehension)
1. That I [Mohammad Habibullah] am the Tadbirkar (applicant) of the case on behalf of the petitioner and well conversant with the fact and circumstances of the case and as such I am competent to swear this affidavit 
2. That the guard of the house is a eye witness of the occurrence from where the pick up of the victim Salauddin Ahmed [took place], which is published in Daily 'Prothom Alo' newspaper on 13.03.2015. Desh TV also take a interview of the guard. 
Copy of the 'Prothom Alo' is annexed 

3. The police of Uttara Police Station picked up the guard of the house, from where Salauddin Ahmed was picked up by the law enforcing agencies, who is eye-witness of the occurrence and tortured him so he will not say or disclose that the law enforcing agencies picked up the victim Salauddin Ahmed. 
4. That is is stated that the petitioner's husband is picked up by the law enforcing agency on 10.03.2015 without any connection with criminal case and without any warrant of arrest of competent couts. The said news has been published in the different newspaper the following days. 
Copies of the said papers annexed 
5. That the personal assistant of the victim Salauddin Ahmed, namely Osman Goni, driver Shafique and Khokon were arrested from their respective house on 07.03.2015 but police forwarded them before the Magistrate on 10.03.2015. The law enforcing agencies knowing information from them picked up Salauddin Ahmed on 10.03.2015 at about 10.30, the owner of the house from where Salauddin Ahmed  picked up said over mobile to the petitioner that the law enforcing agencies members picked up Salauddin Ahmed on 10.03.2015 at about 10.30. 
 6. That the statement of the opposite parties in counter affidavit made in paragraph 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 17 are not true because several news paper, on line media and electronic media (TV) published broadcast that the member of the law enforcing authorities picked up Salauddin Ahmed …. 
7. That the statement of the opposite parties in counter affidavit made in paragraphs no 4. is not true because the victim Salauddin Ahmed was a brilliant student. He has studied in the University of Dhaka with subject of law. He served in administration (Magistrate) …. He was former APS of former Prime Minister Begum Khaleda Zia in the period of 1991 to 1996. He is a former elected MP of Coxs Bazaar-1. He was a state minister in the period of 2001 to 2--6. He is now Joint Secretary of BNP and he is a very popular leader. 
8. That the statement of the opposite parties in counter affidavit mde in paragraph No.10 is not true. The real fact is that the petitioner went to the Gulshan and Uttara police station to lodge an allegation but the police of both police station did not take any GD or Ejahar.
Advocate Masud Rana

No comments:

Post a Comment