Morning News
1st June 1960
SK. MUJIBUR RAHMAN ACQUITTED
(By Our Staff Reporter)
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, a former East Pakistan Minister and General Secretary of the now-defunct Awami League, and his younger brother, Sheikh Abu Nasser were acquitted yesterday by Mr. A. S. M. Rashed, Special Judge, Dacca.
Sheikh Mujibur Rahman was charged with misusing offficial powers and position, as a Minister, by obtaining pecuniary advantages for his younger brother and also for the Awami League Party fund. Sheikh Nasser faced his trial for abetting Shiekh Mujibur Rahman in the commission of the offence.
The prosecution case briefly stated was that a partnership firm under the style of “Al-Amin Industries” was started by Mrs. Haji Sekandar Ali, his son Anwar Ali, Mujibur Rahman Chowdhury and Golam Haider Chowdhury with a view to set up a calendering plant at Satihati in Mymensingh district. The partners of the firm applied on August 4, 1956 for grant of permission to set up the plant. They also applied for an import licence for importing the machineries for installing the industry. This application remained pending with the Government of East Pakistan. Meanwhile, the Awami League party came to power. In the Awami League Cabinet, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman became the minister in charge of Commerce, Labour and Industries Department, Government of East Pakistan. Subsequently, the prosecution alleged, the partners of the firm came in contact with Sheikh Mujibur Rahman through his younger brother Sheikh Abu Nasser in connection with the grant of permission and licence for the firm. It was stated that Sheikh Mujibur Rahman made a proposal to the partners that if they agreed to pay Rs. 1,500 to the Awami League Party fund, of which he was the General Secretary, and if they further agreed to give three annas share of the firm to his younger brother, they would get the licence.
The prosecution then stated that having no alternative, the partners agreed to the proposal and took Nasser as the fifth partner and also paid Rs.1,500 to Sheikh Mujibur Rahman for the Awami League Partly fund. Accordingly, it was stated, a partnership deed was also executed by the five partners including Sheikh Nasser. Thereafter, the prosecution alleged, the requisite permission and import licence were granted to the firm at the instance of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.
DEFFENCE CONTENTION
The defence, however, pleaded not guilty. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman pleaded his ignorance about the alleged partnership deed. He further stated that as a minister he had little concern with the granting of licence and permission to set up the plant. About the alleged payment of Rs. 1,500 to him as subscription towards the Awami League by the partners of the firm, Sheikh Mujibur Rahman pleaded that the entire story was based on fabrication and falsehood having no foundation whatsoever and that he had never obtained pecuniary advantages either for himself or for anybody else.
Acquitting them the Judge held that in the partnership business, the most material witnesses were the original partners, Majibar Rahman Chowdhury, Haji Sekandar Ali, his son Anwar Ali and Golam Haider Chowdhury. “Mujibar Rahman Chowdhury and Anwar Ali, have deposed in the case, the remaining two are found absent on call. The prosecution filed a petition that they had been gained over. So far Majibar Rahman Chowdhury and Anwar Ali are Concerned, they did not support the prosecution case. On the other hand, they gave a go-by to the entire prosecution case. It is said by Majibar Rahman Chowdhury that except contacting the Secretary of C.L.&l Department he did not approach anybody to make ‘tadbir.’ He further said that it was to have a joint partnership business that Abu Nasser was taken as a partner.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
“This witness was the Managing Director of the firm and he does not connect Sheikh Mujibur Rahman in any way. It appears from his evidence that he was not only examined by the police during the investigation but his statement was also recorded by a Magistrate First Class and he “Whatever the reasons for introducing the alleged story of payment prosecution has failed to substantiate the alleged payment. I am, therefore, unsigned the statement after it was read over to him. The witness however says that he made the statement before the Magistrate under the pressure of the Anti-Corruption police. He was declared hostile and was allowed to be cross-examined by the Prosecution. During cross examination he says that he made false statement before the Magistrate. He means to say that it was done under pressure of the Anticorruption police. Further, we find from his statement that he did not make any report to the S.D.O, D.M. or the Martial law authorities about the pressure”.
“I am perfectly convinced that this witness has been gained over by the accused side and I am not inclined to believe that under the pressure of the Anti-corruption Department, he made the statement before the Magistrate. Whomsover might be responsible for the going over of the witness, no credence can be given to the evidence such a witness and as matter of fact, we do not find anything from the evidence or this witness to support the prosecution case.”
The Judge further held that the next witness Anwar Ali was also of the same category. “His evidence also does not connect Sheikh Majibur Rahman in the matter of partnership. I am therefore, convinced that he too was gained over and no reliance could be placed on the evidence of such a witness.”
With regard to the payment of Rs.1,500 to Sheikh Majibur Rahman as subscription to the Awami League fund by the partners, the Judge observed that there was no evidence against Sheikh Mujibur Rahman to connect him with the alleged transaction. “There is no evidence” the judge held, “on the side of the prosecution to prove that as a matter of fact the alleged amount had been paid by Majibur Rahman Chowdhury to accused Sheikh Majibur Rahman for the Awami League fund. We have already seen that no reliance can be palced on the evidence of Anwar Ali but the nature of accounts maintained in a rough exercise book creates suspicion as to the genuineness of the Khata accounts. It is something unusual that an account of a business firm was maintained in a rough exercise book like this”.
The Judge also referred to the Defence contention that there was no mention of the payment of Rs. 1,500 in the F.I.R. The Judge held that (un)able to give any weight to the khata and I must reject the same. So the story of the alleged payment of Rs. 1,500 towards the Awami League fund has not heen proved and no adverse inference can be drawn on Sheikh Mujibar Rahman on such allegations. Thus I find that the prosecution has failed to establish the charge against Sheikh Majibar Rahman.”
With regard to the connection of Sheikh Abu Nasser in the case, the Judge observed that except the mere fact that he was the younger brother of Majibar Rahman and that he was taken as a partner of “Al-Amin Industries” by giving three annas share without investment of any capital, there was no evidence to substantiate the allegations that his brother Sheikh Majibur Rahman had secured pecuniary benefits for him by absuing his official position as a minister in the matter of the partnership business affairs. The judge observed: “We have already seen that the prosecution has failed to substantiate the accusation against Sheikh Majibur Rahman, so the question of abetment of the offence by Sheikh Abu Nasser does not arise at all.”
The Judge also dealt with the question of his jurisdiction to try the case. At the beginning of the hearing in the case the defence had raised objection as to the jurisdiction of the court to try the case on the ground that the Minister was not a public servant within the meaning of Section 21 of the Pakistan penal Code and as such the Special Judge appointed under the Criminal Amendment Act 1958, had no jurisdiction to try the case. Dealing with the matter elaborately the judge held that he had jurisdiction to try the case as according to his opinion Sheikh Mujibar Rahman was a public servant during the relevant period and his capacity as Minister.
Referring to the defence suggestion that the present case was started against Sheikh Mujibar Rahman just to charas (harass) him in the public eye the Judge observed that the materials before the court were not sufficient to conclude that the present case was brougt with any motive to undermine or lower the prestige of Sheikh Mujibar Rahman in the eye to the public. I am unable (to) accept the defence suggestion regarding the background of the present case”, the Judge added.
Mr. H. S. Suhrawardy with Mr. Abdus Salam Khan, Mr. M. Azam, Mr. Zahiruuddin Ahmed and Mr. Zillur Rahman appeared for the defence while the state was represented by Mr. Azizuddin Ahmed and Mr. Moazzem Hossain Khan.
সূত্র: সংবাদপত্রে বঙ্গবন্ধু দ্বিতীয় খণ্ড: ষাটের দশক ॥ প্রথম পর্ব