RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS THE AGARTALA CONSPIRACY CASE VOL – 2
Compilation and foreword by Sheikh Hasina
বিশেষ দ্রষ্টব্যঃ কপিরাইট সমস্যা যাতে না হয় সেকারণে সকল লেখা শুধুমাত্র ‘only Readable’, ‘non-downloadable’ ও ‘non-clickable’ রাখা হয়েছে। সংগ্রামের নোটবুকের সকল নথি-পত্রিকা-দলিল-সংকলন-বই থেকে নেয়া তথ্য-ছবি-ভিডিও শুধুমাত্র গবেষণার কাজে ব্যবহার্য। বাংলাদেশের স্বাধীনতা সংগ্রাম ও মুক্তিযুদ্ধ গবেষণার জন্য সংগ্রামের নোটবুক একটি অলাভজনক অবাণিজ্যিক স্বেচ্ছাশ্রমে গড়া প্রচেষ্টা।
DEPOSITION OF P.W.45, MR. RAGHUNANDAN SAHA,
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Raghunandan Saha, son of late Sree Nibash Chandra Saha, aged 44 years, by faith Hindu of village Banch Kahonia, P.S. Kotwali, District Mymensingh.
I am an S.I. of police. Since August, 1965 I am attached to Ramna P.S. as Sub-Inspector of police. This search warrant was endorsed to me by my Officer-in-charge to search the residence of Sultanuddin Ahmed. (The search warrant is marked Ext. P.W.45/1.) With this search warrant, I went to the house of Sultanuddin Ahmed at 29/3, Magh Bazar and searched that house. On 9.12.67 at 5 A.M. I searched that house which was occupied by Kamaluddin Ahmed and Sultanuddin Ahmed. I took possession of one note book, one piece of written paper and Saleem College File among other things. This Saleem College File is one that I seized there. (It is now marked Ext. P.W.45/2). I prepared the Seizure list in the presence of witnesses Mr. Abdus Salam and Mr. Mostaque Ahmed. (This Seizure list is now marked Ext. P.W.45/3). This bears my signature and it was also signed by the witnesses.
I also executed the search warrant shown to me, which was endorsed to me by my O.C. (This is marked Ext. P.W. 45/4). This was for searching the house of Abdus Samad of 543, Nayatola, Maghbazar. I searched that house on 9.12.67 at 10-30 A.M. in the presence of witnesses Md. Salamatulla and Md. Waliullah and prepared this Seizure list which bears my signature. (This Seizure List is marked Ext. P.W.45/5). The witnesses also signed it. This diary now marked Ext. P W.45/6, this Certificate of Discharge now marked Ext. P.W.45/7, this Airman’s Service Book now marked Ext. P.W.45/8, these two reports
Page: 1
now marked Ext. P.W.45/9 and 45/10, were among the documents seized by me there.
CROSS- EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
I did not affect any arrest in this case. I saw in the first house, Sultanuddin and Kamaluddin, as well as Kamaluddin’s wife, staying in that house, when I went there. In the house at Nayatola, I only found Samad when I went there. I submitted a report to my O.C. on the back of the warrant Ext. P.W.45/1, after executing the warrant. The date given by me of the report is 8.12.67. It actually should be 9.12.67. This I say because I prepared the Seizure List on the 9th and also I affected the search on the 9th. I did not conduct any search on the 8th. This mistake was detected by me when asked about the date, for the first time in this Court in Cross-Examination. (The learned Counsel for the defence wishes the witness to be cross-examined tomorrow. Today after examining the documents they have been produced today. The witness will be called tomorrow for further cross-examination).
DEPOSITION OF P.W.46, ABDUS SALAM ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
(The witness was interpreted the oath in Bengali by the Assistant Registrar, Mr. Atiar Rahman, as he does not know English. The Assistant Registrar will also interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is Abdus Salam, son of Abdul Gaffur, aged 24 years, by faith Muslim, of village Bhardhanpara, P.S. Nawabaganj, Dist. Dacca.
To Mr. T.H. KHAN:
I do not exactly remember Kamaluddin and Sultanuddin but I know their house. I know that a police party holds a search in their house in my presence. That was on the 9th of December, 1967 at 5 A.M. The police seized a note book, a khata and a letter. The police prepared a seizure list and I signed the seizure list. I find my signature on the seizure list, Ext. P.W.45/3.
Page: 2
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.46, ABDUS SALAM:
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
Sultanuddin and Kamaluddin were present at the time of the search. I cannot exactly say whether they were arrested on that date. I was in that house as long as the police party was there and I heard the police people asking Kamaluddin and Sultanuddin to take their clothes so that they could accompany the police. I did not go to their house before the arrival of the police. When I went there I found the police already present there. I cannot distinctly remember as to from which room and from which place which articles were seized. There are 3 rooms in that house, I did not find Sultanuddin ill at that time He was wearing a jumper then. The police did not search me before I entered the room. The police people themselves showed us that they were not carrying, before entering the house. I can read Bengali but not English. I reside 3 miles away from the place of search. I am a film artist. The police people called me at that time from a restaurant ‘Cafe Raj’ in Maghbazar. I was at that time returning from my studio. My studio is Eastern Theatre, Maghbazar. A shooting was going on there at that time. In the night the shooting was going on in the Eastern Theatre and on completion of that, I was returning. The film for which the shooting was going on is ‘Rupkumari’. At the restaurant, I was alone there and the others had already left. There were other houses in the neighbourhood where the search was conducted. Respectable persons live in these houses. The rooms searched were on the first floor of the building, I cannot say whether any people were living on the ground floor of the building because the rooms were locked at that hour. There were 3-4 police officers there at the time of the search. There was another member of the public there also. Another gentleman was picked up from the adjoining house. He himself told me of that.
The New Circular Road is about 250 to 300 yards away from the place of search.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 3
DEPOSITION OF P.W.47, MOSTAQUE AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION.
My name is Mostaque Ahmed, son of Muhammad Hanif of 29/1-A, New Circular Road, Ramna, Dacca.
To MR. T.H. KHAN:
Tendered:
(No defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 4
DEPOSITION OF P.W.48, MD.WALIULLAH ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
(As the witness does not know English Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register has interpreted to him the oath in Bengali. He will also interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is Md. Waliullah, son of late Hasan Ali, aged 60 years, by faith Muslim, of 535, Nayatola, Dacca.
I was a chowkidar’ at Tejgaon Airport and I am now working as care-taker. I live in a house in Maghbazar, Nayatola. The number of house is 535. It is a four roofed C.I. tin-shed with mud walls. I have also a house at 543, Nayatola and I rented that house to Mujibur Rahman and Abdus Samad on the 2nd of November or December, 1967. This rented house is about 600 cubits away from the house I reside in. The rent was fixed at Rs. 140/- per month. There was a lease deed drawn up which I handed over to Ghulam Mohammad for obtaining the signatures of Mujibur Rahman and others but he never brought it back to me. In that rented house, used to live, Mujibur Rahman, Samad, Ghulam Mohammad and another military man whose name I do not know. (The witness was asked to point out Mujibur Rahman and Samad. He said he is unable to point out them). I do not know if anything happened at this house while they were living there. The police came to that house and seized some papers and I signed the Seizure List as a witness. I see my signature on the Seizure List Ext. P.W.45/5.
Page: 5
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED:
I do not remember the date on which the police came and took these documents. Only once did police come to that house. I did not search the police officers before they entered the house. There were four or five police officers who came there.
There were three or four constables besides the police officers. The police came to the house between 10-30 and 11 A.M. I cannot give the day of the week on which they came. My duty hours were from 1 P.M. to 9 P.M. at the Airport. According to my convenience, my duty hours could be changed to 7 A.M. to 1 P.M. also on any day. There are in all 47 or 48 chowkidars in the airport. Other chowkidars have to follow a duty roster prepared by me. I, being the care-taker, can adjust my own timing. I do not remember having mentioned the name Ghulam Mowla instead of Ghulam Mohammad, in my statement to the police (so recorded). There were one or two military vehicles in which the police came. Besides the police in uniform, there were some persons in plain clothes. I do not know whether they belonged to the military or not. The plain clothed men were about three or four in number. I did not hand over any rent receipt to the police for that house. Someone from outside had drafted the rent deed but I do not know who he was. It was written Bengali. I was not examined by the police before coming to this Court, after the search.
TO MR. ABDUL MOMEN:
I do not remember if I stated to the police that I had given the lease deed to Ghulam Mohammad for obtaining signature (not so recorded).
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 6
CORRECTION
29.11.68.
The statement of P.W.48, Md. Wali Ullah has been explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and he now states that it is correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Member
Page: 7
DEPOSITION OF P.W.49, SALAMATULLAH ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar has given him the oath in Bengali and he will interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is Md. Salamatullah, son of Dinnatullah Bhuiyan, aged 32 years, by faith Muslim, of 488, Nayatola, Dacca.
I reside in Nayatola, Dacca. In December last, police came and searched for a house in Nayatola in my presence. That house belongs to Md. Waliullah, witness. I signed the Seizure List as a witness which was prepared by the police after taking certain articles in the search from that house. I see my signatures on the Seizure List Ext. P.W.45/5. The number of my house is 488, Nayatola. The house that was searched may be about 300 feet from my house.
CROSS-EXAMTNATION :
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED:
I am a contractor by profession and I also run a Pen shop. I am a first class registered contractor. I do not pay any income tax. There are two houses between my house and the house searched. I went to the house searched between 10 and 11 A.M. The Seizure List was prepared after I had arrived at the house. It was not being prepared when I arrived there. The list was started to be prepared immediately after my arrival there. I saw one police officer there and some constables. These police people were in uniform but there were other persons in plain clothes some 8 to 10 numbers. There were some three or four vehicles standing
Page: 8
at the spot, they included military vehicle, jeep and private car. There were about 14 or 15 persons inside the house when I entered there. I was standing there when the police prepared the Seizure List. I was asked to sign and I did sign it and came back.
TO COURT:
I did see the police taking certain papers from the house on search. They were taken out from a suitcase from under a bed-stead kept on the north side of a room.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 9
CORRECTION
29.11.1968
The statement of P.W.49, Salamat Ullah has been explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and now he states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 10
DEPOSITION OF P.W.50, YUSUFUDDIN AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Yusufuddin Ahmed, son of late Khawajuddin Ahmed, by faith a Muslim, aged 56 years of village Dohila, P.S. Shibganj, District Bogra.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN:
I am posted here as an Assistant Commissioner, Relief & Rehabilitation and ex-officio Section Officer, Works, Housing & Planning Department, Govt. of East Pakistan, since 16’h December, 1966. The police went to my office and seized some documents about 5 or 6 months ago. A seizure list was prepared by the police and I signed the seizure list. My Head Clerk, Mr. A.B. Badruddin also signed that seizure list but unfortunately he is dead now. This is the seizure list that was prepared. (It is marked as Ext. P.W. 50/1). This bears my signature. It also bears the signature of my Head Clerk, Mr. A. B. Badruddin deceased. The Issue Register containing Ext. P.W.6/12, the Show Cause Notice Ext. P.W.6/2, the application for allotment marked as Ext. P.W.6/1, were seized by the police in my presence along with other documents.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.50 YUSUFUDDIN AHMED: TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
On the basis of the report of the Administrative Officer, Mohammadpur and Mirpur Housing Estates, I made remarks in the show
Page: 11
cause notice, Ext. P.W. 6/2, that the house in question was occupied by unauthorized persons. The specifications of the persons must be in the report. This report, I presume, must be in my office. I do not know whether this was on the basis of complaints by the residents of the locality to the Administrative officer. The notice was also given on the ground that the notice receiver was residing elsewhere.
(No other learned Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 12
CORRECTION
11.11.1968.
P.W.50 Mr. Yusufuddin Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and how states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 13
DEPOSITION OF P.W.51, MD. AKIBUL HUSAIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Mr. Akibul Husain, son of late Torab Husain Mia, aged 39 years of village Sawai, Gopalpur, District Mymensingh.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN:
Now I am attached to Savar Police Station since January, 1968, before that, I was attached to Ramna Police Station. This warrant was endorsed to me by my O/C for execution. (This search warrant is marked as Ext. P.W.51/1). This was for searching in hotel CASSERINA to seize the hotel register from there. Accordingly, I went to the hotel CASSERINA and searched that premises and seized one hotel register. I seized the register now marked as Ext. P.W.51/2, and prepared a seizure list, Ext. 51/3. This bears my signatures. This was prepared in the presence of the witness, Mr. Ghulam Mostafa Chowdhury and Bablu Mia. They also signed on this seizure list in my presence.
(None of the learned Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be correctly recorded
Page: 14
CORRECTION
2.12.1968.
P.W.51, Mr. Akibul Husain has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement is correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 15
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 52, BABRU MIA ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(The witness was interpreted the oath in Bengali by the Assistant Registrar, Mr. Atiar Rahman, as he does not know English. The Assistant Registrar will also interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is Babru Mia, son of late Rashed Mia, aged 41 years, I am residing at 52, Kakrail, P.S. Ramna, and Dist. Dacca.
The witness was tendered for cross-examination
(None of the learned Counsel wishes to cross-examination the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and explained to the witness and admitted to be correct.
Page: 16
DEPOSITION OF P.W.55, MR. A. A. KHAN AFRIDI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION.
My name is A. A. Khan Afridi, son of Emtiaz Ahmed Khan, aged 32 years, by faith Muslim, 40 Elephant Road, Maghbazar, Dacca.
I am at present Engineer Superintendent in IWTA at Dacca, since 1965. Police seized one paper from the office of the Secretary, IWTA in my presence. The seizure list was prepared and I signed that Seizure List. (The Seizure List is marked Ext.P.W.55/1). This was the paper that was seized by the police. (It is now marked Ext. P.W.55/2). This document bears the signature or Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain and I am familiar with his signature. (The witness correctly identified Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain, accused in the dock).
CROSS-EXAMINATIONS: TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
I know that Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain left for Barisal after joining the IWTA. In December, 1967, Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain went to Pindi but I would not be able to give the exact date. It was in the first part of December. It was on a message from his Naval Headquarters.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 25
CORRECTION
8.11.68.
P.W.55, Mr. A. A. Khan Afridi has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 26
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS.
8.11.1968 :
PRESENT.
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman .
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before.
For the Defence: As before.
Accused present: As before.
Witness on oath: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.56, MR. Z.B.M. BAKHT ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Z.B.M. Bakht, son of Mr. G.M.M.F. Bakht, aged 30 years, by faith Muslim, of 22, Rajani Bose Lane, P.S. Kotwali, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 28
DEPOSITION OF P.W.57, MUHAMMAD LOKMAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Muhammad Lokman, son of Kala Khan, aged about 45 years, by faith Muslim, of 4, Green Road, P.S. Lalbagh, Dacca. (The oath has been interpreted to the witness in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, as the witness does not know English. He will also interpret his evidence).
I have a tailoring shop at Green Road. In my presence, the police searched a house in Green Square. A negative, a bank paper and a letter were recovered from there by the Police. I do not remember if a seizure list was prepared. I see my thumb-impression on the document shown to me, Ext. P.W.1576. A negative like the one shown to me, Ext.P.W.15/5, was recovered but I could not see exactly what it was, as I have defective eyesight.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN: One man had produced a negative before the police at that time. I do not know that man. My shop is only 2/3 minutes walking distance from the house searched. There were two or three persons including the Police Officer there.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 29
CORRECTION
29.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.57, Md. Lokman has been explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal and he now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 30
DEPOSITION OF P.W.58, MR. ABDUL WAHAB ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Abdul Wahab, son of Naku Mia, aged 45 years, by faith Muslim, of village Satar Paiya, P.S. Senbagh, District Noakhali. (The oath has been intercepted to the witness in Bengali as he does not know English, by Mr. Atiar Rahman; Assistant Registrar who will also interpret is evidence).
I am Chowkider at the Feni Dak Bungalow. It is a C&B Dak Bungalow. I know Ex-Subeder Jalaluddin Ahmed. At About 12-30 in the night, a person who was described to me as an officer came and stayed in the Dak Bungalow in July, 1967. He did not, however, enter his name and other particulars in the Dak Bungalow Register. I did not know wherefrom he had come to the Dak Bungalow. He stayed there at night from 12-30 to 1-30 A.M. I was in front of the Dak Bungalow when he left it at that time, on foot.
I came to Dacca in May, 1968. I came to Dacca on receipt of a notice through the police. I came by myself to a place where T.I. Parade was being held. I do not know what place it was. I came and stayed at the Shankar Boarding House. Two men in plain clothes took me to that place in a jeep where the parade was held. I identified a person at that parade. He was the very person who had come and stayed at the Dak Bungalow during the night I had mentioned. There were 30 to 35 other persons in the parade besides the man I identified.
Page: 31
CROSS- EXAMINATION: TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
I do not find that man among the accused in the dock.
(The witness said this after going near the dock and scrutinising the accused). When the man came to the Dak Bungalow, I was in my own room. I live with my family there. It was Jalaluddin Ahmed who had called me out from my quarter and asked me to accommodate the person who had arrived. He described him as a Military “Bara Saheb”. Besides Jalaluddin, there were two or three other persons who came with me. I did not tell the Police that in the morning I found that the gentleman had left the Dak Bungalow with the key (so recorded). One has to enter his name and particulars in the Dak Bungalow Register if he stays there. One, Ruhul Amin, had come with me from Feni to Dacca. On arrival here we went direct to Shankar Boarding.
We went to the Shanker Boarding house because we enquired from Baby-taxi man who had brought us as to where we could stay and he gave us that name. From the Shanker Boarding House, I sent information about our arrival to the District Intelligence Branch of Police. A man in plain clothes came to the Shanker Boarding house to enquire whether we were there and then we sent information through him to the DIB office. That man who had taken the message did not come in a jeep to take us but he sent a jeep. The jeep came with the driver and one other man in plain clothes. We were taken to a big building where the TI parade was held. I do not remember how many stories the building had. Nor do I remember if it was more than one-storied. I have come to this area in which the Court is located, for the first time now. I am informed now that this place is in the cantonment area. No photograph was shown to me by the police. A man in plain clothes had gone to Feni and questioned me. He, I learnt, was a Police man. I was questioned that 5 or 6 months after that gentleman had stayed at the Dak Bungalow. I was called to the Feni Thana for that interrogation. When I was interrogated in a room of the Thana there was nobody else present. I do not know whether anybody else was examined by the police on that day. I was called to the T. I.
Page: 32
parade in Dacca about 3 or 4 months after I was interrogated at Feni. I cannot remember who stayed at the Dak Bungalow previous to the date on which the Saheb stayed at the Dak Bungalow. I do not remember who stayed at the Dak Bungalow on the day after he had visited the Dak Bungalow
The T.I. parade took place in the Veranda of a room.
TO MR. MD. ISMAIL:
I did not enquire from was the man came to the Shanker Boarding House as to who he was. The Magistrate at the T.I. parade only asked me to see if I knew anybody in the parade.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 33
CORRECTION
11.11.68.
The statement of P.W.58, Abdul Wahab has been read over and explained to him in Bengal by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar. He states it is correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 34
DEPOSITION OF P.W.59, RUHUL AMIN ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(The witness was interpreted the oath in Bengali by the Assistant Registrar, Mr. Atiar Rahman, as he does not know English. The Assistant Registrar will also interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is Ruhul Amin, son of Abdus Salam, aged 22 years, by faith a Muslim of village Jahanpur, P.S. Feni, District Noakhali.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I know Hotel Dinofa in Feni. I served as a manager of that hotel for 6 months about 6 months ago. I know ex-subedar, Jalaluddin Ahmed. On the 10th of July, 1968, he booked seats for 4 persons in the hotel. The present year is 1968 according to the English calendar. It was about a year from today that those seats were booked in the hotel. I allotted the seats to him as requested, for 4 persons. Your persons actually came and occupied those seats. They came in the month of July on the 11th and left on the 14″. Those 4 persons came to the hotel in Baby-taxies. They arrived there at about 1 p.m. One of those 4 persons entered their names and particulars in the hotel register. The register I see here now, marked as Ext. P.W.59/1 is of the Hotel Dinofa. In this register, the entries within red-line, marked as Ext. P. W. 59/2, bearing serial numbers 46, 47, 48, & 49 are the entries that were made by one or those 4 guests. I was present when the police seized this register from the hotel. I did not see any other person coming to meet them.
Page: 35
(The witness was asked by the Court whether anyone had come to meet them during of the days the yesterday there. He then said, “I do not remember”). During their stay in the hotel, those 4 persons used to go out and come back. I only saw them going out during day time but not during night time. Jalaluddin introduced those 4 persons to me saying that these were the 4 military personnel who would stay there.
(At this stage the learned Counsel for the defence objected that this statement should not go on record because Jalaluddin did not say this. The objection is valid and the description of the persons said to have been given by Jalaluddin will not be a part of the record).
Jalaluddin is still residing in a house behind a Cinema Hall, in Feni, with his family. About 9 or 10 months from now I was interrogated by a Police officer at Feni P.S.
I came by train from Feni to Dacca in May, 1968 in order to identify those 4 persons who had stayed at that hotel. There was a T.I. parade at which I was asked to identify them but I cannot remember at which I was asked to identify them 50 persons in the parade. There was a Magistrate present at the parade. I identified 3, out of the 4 persons in that parade, as the persons who had stayed at the hotel Dinofa. (The witness was asked to identify those 3 persons in the dock but he could not identify those 3 persons in the accused’s dock as according to him, some of them had from beards, now).
CROSS-EXAMINATION: TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN.
Under the column for the destination on departure in Ext. P.W.59/2, the word ‘Dacca’ in Bengali has been written by me. I do not find any over-writing on the dates of departure in these entries. There is no over-writing but one date has been struck off and another has been written in the column, originally also this was written by me as 14″h, according to the correct to say that these dates were initially 10th or 11th, but the same has been changed to 14″h, according to the instructions of the police. Feni Railway Station is not situated on the
Page: 36
main highway from Chittagong to Dacca. Hotel Dinofa is, however, situated on this main road.
I have known Jalaluddin for the last one or one and a half years. The residence of Jalaluddin is about 200 to 300 cubits away from our hotel. I had been to his house. He has two sons I know, but I do not know how many daughters he has got. The serial number maintained in the register begins in the beginning of the year and continues up to the end of it. I cannot, however, say as to from which month the serial number begins in our register according to the serial number begins in our register. We maintain the register according to the English Calendar. The serial numbers are started in the month of January. Serial number has started from the 16″ of June, 1967, in this register. Finally, these four persons left at about 7 or 8 a. m. on the last day of their stay, Hotel ‘Dinofa’ is a big 2-storied building. There are nine rooms for residence. It faces the West. There are shops on either side of this hotel building. There is a petrol pump to the south of this hotel. That Petrol Pump is located just at the corner of the hotel. I received a summons for coming to Dacca for the T. I. Parade. I reached Dacca a day prior to the parade. I stayed in a hotel in Dacca, but I do not know its name. I was taken to that hotel by a person who escorted me from the Railway Station, but I do not know his name. We went there in a baby-taxi. I did not send any information to the police or to anybody to the effect that I had reached Dacca. I intimated to the Feni Thana the time when I would be reaching Dacca. A person came to take me to the place of the T.I. parade. I went there by a jeep. A driver brought that jeep. There was no other person accompanying the driver. We left the hotel for the place of the T. I. parade at about 8 or 9 a.m. In that jeep, there were, in all, 8 or 9 persons when we started for the T. I. parade. Those 8 or 9 persons were also there for identifying. None of those 8 or 9 persons were known to me from before. The T. I. parade took place inside a room in a building. I went to that place for participating in the test identification parade on two occasions. These two days were consecutive. On the first day, I identified three persons. On the second day, I could not identify anybody.
Page: 37
I said that some of these accused persons have grown beards as I see that they have done so. It is not a fact that when I identified three persons in the T. I. parade, they had already beards. Only one of those three persons had a beard at the time of the identification parade.
TO COURT:
On being asked to why in that case, he could not identify that one person who beard at the time of identification parade, the witness says “I cannot recollect his face now”.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
The hotel was not stopped at any time. It was running continuously. There is no entry in this register after September, because we had opened a new register.
No photograph of anybody was shown to me by the police. I was asked questions by the police at Feni thana. I know that there is a rule the boarders in a hotel have to write their own names and to sign in the hotel register themselves. I do not remember the month when I was examined by the police. I was examined by the police about 3/4 months after the time when these four boarders stayed in my hotel. The police asked for the hotel register when they examined me. The police examined this register on the very same day when I was examined by them in the Feni P.S., for the first time. The police took away the register also on that day.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 38
CORRECTION
11.11.68.
The statement of P.W.59, Ruhul Amin has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar and he states that the statement is correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 39
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 60 KHOKA BARUA ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is Khoka Barua, son of Hridays Ranjan Barua, aged about 22 years, by faith Buddhist of village satkura, P.S. Boalkali, Dist. Chittagong.
(The oath has been interpreted to the witness in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assist. Registrar as he does not know English, he will also interpret his evidence).
I have been a Room Bearer in the hotel Miska, Chittagong since 1964. As a Bearer in the hotel, I have to open the rooms, clean the bed and serve the food to the hotel guests.
(The witness was asked if he saw any of the persons in the dock, in his hotel at any time. The witness went to the dock, examined the accused in the dock and said, “I am unable to identify any such persons”).
I came to Dacca from Chittagong in May, 1968, to attend a T. I. parade. I cannot name the place where the T.I. parade took place. In the T. I. parade, about 30 to 40 people were put up. There was a Magistrate at the T.I. parade. I identified three persons in the parade. These three persons went to our hotel in 1966 and stayed there for 2 or 3 days. I cannot remember the month in which they resided in our hotel.
I attended the T. I. parade on two days. On the first day I identified two persons and on the subsequent day I identified one person. (On being asked whether he is in a position to describe any one of those three
Page: 41
persons whom he identified, he said “I can recognise them if I see them. I cannot describe them because I do not distinctly remember”.)
I was examined by the Police at the hotel MISKA.
TO COURT: I cannot recognise any of those 3 persons whom I identified, from the persons in the dock.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.60, KHOKA BARUA: TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
The rent of a single-seated room is Rs. 10/- per day and for a doubleseated a room the rent is Rs. 17/- per day. Some of the double-seated rooms are also priced at Rs. 15/- per day.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 42
CORRECTION
11.11.68.
The statement of P.W.60, Khoka Barua has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar and he states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 43
DEPOSITION OF P.W.61, MD. YUSUF ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(The witness was interpreted the oath in Bengali by the Assistant Registrar, Mr. Atiar Rahman, as he does not know English. The Assistant Registrar will also interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is Md. Yusuf. Son of Mir Ahmed, aged 22 years, by faith a Muslim of village & P.S. Double Mooring, District Chittagong.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I am a motor driver. Since 1961 I am serving as a driver in the East Bengal Ship and Trading Industrial Corporation Company Limited, Chittagong. I am still working there. I have been driving a Vauxhall car. Car No. EBC 1818 belongs to this Company. In July, 1966 I had driven this car as part of my work under this Company. Under the direction of our Manager, I went to the Circuit House and met one, Mr. Ojha, who enquired of me if the car was sent by the East Bengal Ship Trading and Industrial Corporation Co. I said ‘Yes’ to that and them he took me to the New Market in the car. The Circuit House is located just in front of Stadium at Chittagong. I took Mr. Ojha to the New Market. I took him in my car and came to the Chittagong Railway Station from the New Market. I did not go out on any other occasion along with my car. Apart from going to the New Market and Railway Station with Mr. Ojha, I did not go to any other place with him in that car.
Page: 44
I know Hotel Khyam in Chittagong. I know Bipani Bitan in Chittagong that is the name of the New Market. I am a resident of Chittagong town. I have heard the name of Dr. Saidur Rahman. I had never gone to the house of Dr. Saidur Rahman.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.61, MD. YUSUF: TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED:
I cannot remember taking anybody else in that car to any other place. (No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 45
CORRECTION
20.11.68.
The statement of P.W.61, Yusuf has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 46
DEPOSITION OF P.W.62, DALILUDDIN AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(The witness was interpreted the oath in Bengali by the Assistant Registrar, Mr. Atiar Rahman, as he does not know English. The Assistant Registrar will also interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is Daliluddin Ahmed, son of Gagan Ali Matabbar, aged 41 years, by faith Muslim of village Illah, P.S. Gaurnadi, District Barisal.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I am a business man. I know the firm of M/S. Talukdar in Chittagong. I served in that firm for 5 to 7 years ago. I know Abu Shama Lutful Huda of Faridpur. He had a business in Chittagong about 2 years ago. I saw Lutful Huda in May, 1967 in Chittagong. When I met him he had a companion with him. I met Lutful Huda on Momen Road, in the residence of Mr. Talukdar. I also used to reside in the same house of Mr. Talukdar at Momen Road. At that time Mr. Lutful Huda and his companion stayed in that house for a few hours. On my enquiry, I was informed that he was Mr. Rahman and he came from Dacca. (On being asked whether he is in a position to identify this Mr. Rahman, the witness went near the dock and examined the accused and stated). “I cannot identify him”.
Page: 47
TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED:
I cannot remember whom I saw at Talukdar’s house on an occasion subsequent to that I have spoken of. I was not asked any question by anybody before coming to depose in this court.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 48
CORRECTION
11.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.62, Daliluddin Ahmed has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar and he states as follows:
The statement is correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: Page: 49
DEPOSITION OF P.W.63, PROF. S. M. RAB ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is S.M. Rab, son of Syed Mujibur Huq, aged about 39 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at 188, Dhanmondi, Dacca.
I am Professor of Medicine, Dacca Medical College Hospital, Dacca. I am a member of some International Organisations relating to Medicine. I have a special interest in Cardiology. I started as Associate Professor in the Dacca Medical College Hospital in 1958 and I became a Professor there from December, 1964.
I know accused Sk. Mujibur Rahman. I might have treated him in 1965. He has been my patient for a long time. Angio-neurotic Ocdema is a disease which is associated with so many ailments. I cannot recall whether I treated Sk. Mujibur Rahman for this disease. When asked by the Prosecution Counsel whether he was examined by the police in connection with this case, the witness stated. I recollected in this connection that once, a few months ago, a police officer dropped into my consulting room and asked whether I was the Physician of Sk. Mujibur Rahman. This is the only question he asked me. I do not know whether any other Physician was also treating Sk. Mujibur Rahman. I have always written my prescriptions in my own hand.
(At this stage the Prosecution Counsel states that he will recall this witness when he has any material to put to the witness).
CROSS-EXAMINATION: TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL:
I do not remember if any police officer came to me in May, 1967.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be Correct.
Page: 51
CORRECTION
11.11.1968.
P.W.64, Mr. M. A. Quayum has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 52
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS.
11.11.1968.
PRESENT:
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before.
For the Defence: As before.
Accused present: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.64, MR. M. A. QUYYUM OF SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is M. A. Quyyum son of Abdul Quyyum, 143/F, Road No. 5, Dhanmondi, Dacca. I am an employee in the National and Grindlays Bank, Dacca. I think it was on the 14″ February, 1968 that the police came to our Bank and seized a savings bank cheque in my presence. The seizure list was prepared by the police, which I signed. I see here the seizure list which now marked Ext. P.W.64/1. It bears my signature. I see here cheque which was seized on that occasion. (It is marked Ext. P.W.64/2).
(None of the defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be correct.
Page: 53
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 65, A. TAWHEED ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is A. Tawheed son of Late Mvi. Abdul Karim age 46, 405 A, Khilgaon Rehabilitation Zone, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination. No cross-examination.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 54
DEPOSITION OF P.W.66, MD. WAZED ALI AKHUND
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Wazed Ali Akhund son of Munshi Abdul Khaleque aged 27 of village Maista, P.S. Kalihati, District Mymenshing.
I am attached to D.A.B., Dacca. Previously I was attached to Lalbagh Police station as S.I. I seized a Moscovich car from the residential area on 25.2.1968. I prepared a seizure list which I see here. (It is marked P.W.66/1).
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
I did obtain the search warrant for seizing the car. The search warrant was endorsed to me by the O.C. Lalbagh Police Station. I see here the search warrant which was entrusted to me on that occasion. (It is marked Ext. DL/1). I find on this warrant that it was endorsed to S.I. Abdul Hashem of the S.B. On the back of the warrant, however, there is an endorsement of the O.C. Lalbagh marking it to me for helping Abdul Hashem. I knew S.I. Abul Hashem of the Special Branch. He went to me for the search. I myself conducted the search and wrote the report on this warrant. I also prepared the seizure list. In the seizure list, his name is not mentioned nor in my report on the warrant. I am 27 and direct recruit to the Sub-Inspector’s rank. Road number 27 in Dhanmondi is the limit of jurisdiction of Lalbagh Police Station. I have noted in the seizure list the place of search to be 145/E, Road number 2, Dhanmandi.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be correct.
Page: 55
CORRECTION
11.11.1968.
P.W.66, Mr. Md. Wajed Ali has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 56
DEPOSITION OF P.W.67, KHAIRUL HUDA ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
No.5, Dhanmondi, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination: None of the defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 57
DEPOSITION OF P.W.68, MD. ZUBAIR SIDDIQUE ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Zubair Siddique son of Wazir Hossain Siddiqui, aged 26, resident of 31/9, Tajmahol Road, Mohammadpur, Dacca.
TO MR.T.H. KHAN: I am an employee of the Eastern Banking Corporation the police came there and took possession of a jeep from the Bank premises in my presence. The police prepared a seizure list here which I signed as a witness. I see the seizure list here which is marked Ext. P.W.68/1. The jeep had been mortgaged to the Bank by Kamaluddin Ahmed.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 58
CORRECTION
4.12.1968.
P.W.68, Md. Zubair Siddiqui has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 59
DEPOSITION OF P.W.69, KAZI MESBAUDDIN AHMED
ON: SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Kazi Mesbauddin Ahmed son of Late Kazi Zainuddin, aged 43, resident of 105, Dhanmondi, Road No. 3, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination: No defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 60
DEPOSITION OF P.W.70, MD. MOKHLESUR RAHMAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Md. Mokhlesur Rahman son of Haji Abbas Ali aged 27 of village Jaydebpur, P.S. Luxhum district Comilla.
(The oath has been interpreted to the witness in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, as the witness does not know English. He will also interpret his evidence).
TO MR. T.H. KHAN:
I am an ordinary business man. I reside at 13-B, Abhoydas Lane, Dacca. During the current year, I once saw a Police Inspector or going to the house of Walliullah at 13-B, Abhoydas Lane, Dacca. The owner of the house called me there. When I reached the house, I found a man in plain clothes, sitting with a piece of paper there. The police seized some counter foils of receipts from there in my presence. I see the seizure list that was prepared in my presence. I see my signature on the seizure list as a witness. (The seizure list is made Ext. P.W.70/1). The five documents now marked Ext. P.W.70/2).
Page: 61
CORRECTION
12. 11.1968;
P.W.70, MD. MOKHLESUR RAHMAN :
The statement of P.W.70, Md. Mokhlesur Rahman has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, and he now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 62
P.W.70/3, P.W.70/4, P.W.70/6 are the documents which were seized by the police.
CROSS- EXAMINATION:
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN:
On that occasion, as far as I remember, 4/5 documents were seized by the police. I cannot now recollect whether they were all of the same nature or not. The papers were recovered from the first floor of the house but I cannot say from which room. I cannot say how many rooms there were on the first floor. Neither had I searched the man who was sitting in plain clothes when I did not enter the house, nor did he search me. In the seizure list, I find 6 items mentioned as recovered. I can only read part of the writing in the seizure list and not the whole. The house of Mr. Waliullah is a four-storied one. There were other tenants in that house but I do not know them.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and Admitted to be correct.
Page: 63
DEPOSITION OF P.W.71, MAKHAN LAL GHOSH ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Makhan Lal Ghose, son of Abhi Mannya Ghose, aged 28 years, by faith Hindo. At present, I am residing at 36, Goal Nagar Lane, Dacca.
(The oath has been interpreted to the witness in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, as the witness does not know English. He will also interpret his evidence).
I am a Cashier at the hotel Arzoo, Dacca. I have been there in that capacity for the last four years. I attended a T.I. parade somewhere in the cantonment area. There were about 25-30 persons in the parade. A Magistrate supervised the parade. I identified one person in that parade as a person, who had stayed at Hotel Arzoo in the early part of February, 1966. The man was bald-headed with sunken cheeks.
CROSS- EXAMINATION:
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
The Manager is in-charge of the hotel Register in which boarders put down their names and particulars. Mr. Omar Fateh Khan is the Manager of the hotel at present. One Mr. Manzoor Murshed was the Manager in February, 1966. The bills of the boarders were prepared by the Manager and I received payment of those bills. There was no restaurant there at the time and only boarders came and stayed in the hotel. The bills were taken by the bearers to the boarders in their rooms. Some of them used to pay in their rooms and some used to pay to me. I cannot remember how many days that gentleman stayed in the hotel on that occasion. I cannot
Page: 65
say on which date he came to the hotel and on which date he left. I cannot remember who else came during that period to our hotel and stayed there. The police once came to the hotel and interrogated me.
I cannot name that bald-headed man who stayed at the hotel. Nor Can I say how many bald-headed men stayed in our hotel. I did not tell the police that the men who stayed at our hotel had sunken cheeks. I did not consult the Register when the bills were prepared. The bill is prepared in the name of the person whose name is entered in the hotel Register.
I do not know the name of the person when I went to identify at the T.I. parade. Nor do I know his name uptil now. I did not give his name in my statement to the police (it is mentioned). I do not remember to have asked the name of the payee who used to come to me with the bill. I cannot remember how much the bald-headed man paid in the hotel. Nor can I remember how often he paid. I cannot remember the month in which I was not interrogated by the police, nor how long age that was. I attended the T. I. parade after I had been interrogated by the police but I cannot remember how long after, I cannot give the date or the month. A police car with a driver went to fetch me for the T.I. parade. All the 2530 persons in the T.I. parade were wearing trousers and shirts. I cannot remember if anybody was wearing a suit in that parade. Nor can I say how many persons were wearing Hawaii shirts. Nor can I remember if any of them were wearing any pull- over or sweater. Nor can I exactly say how many of the persons in the parade were bald-headed. Nor can I remember if there was any other bald-headed man in the parade besides the one I identified. Nor can I say if any other persons in the parade had sunken cheeks.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED:
I have come to this Court today on receiving a summons from the Court, on my own. Nobody from the prosecution talked to me about what I was to state in Court today. Almost the entire top of the head of the man was bald. I cannot say if he had a tuft of hair in the front. The man was of medium height. He was of medium built and not fat.
Page: 66
TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL:
I was produced before the Magistrate at the parade. He enquired if I signed the report that was prepared by the Magistrate. The Magistrate merely asked me if I could identify any man in the parade.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 67
CORRECTION
12.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.71, Makhan Lal Ghose has been explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, and he now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 68
DEPOSITION OF P.W.72, A.K. ROY ON SOLEMN ON
AFFIRMATION
(The witness was interpreted the oath in Bengali by the Assistant Registrar, Mr. Atiar Rahman, as he does not know English. The Assistant Registrar will also interpret the evidence of the witness).
My name is A.K. Roy, son of Jamamini Mohan Roy, aged 26 years, by faith a Hindu of village Baliati, P.S. Shaturia, District, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am now serving in the Green View Petrol Pump. I have been there for about 5 years. The Police seized some papers in my presence from the Green View Petrol pump. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see the seizure list Ext. P.W. 54/1 which bears my signature. I see the register here marked Ext. P.W. 54/2. This was one of the registers seized from there and it was entered in the seizure list.
In this register, I see the writing now marked as Ext. P.W.72/1. This is in my hand but I do not know whose signature appears below it. I am only a Bill Clerk in the Petrol Pump. The payment evidenced by these entries may have been received by the Accountant. I cannot say in whose hand the entry on page 2 marked as Ext. P.W.72.2A is, but the endorsement about the bill being paid in full and signed in the hand of the Accountant, Mr. A. B. M. Samad. On the same page, the entries marked Ext. P.W.72/3 are not known to me to be in any particular person’s hand-writing but the endorsement of payment on it is in the hand of the same Accountant, Mr. A. B. M. Samad whose signature appears below it. (The witness was again asked whether the Ext.
Page: 70
P.W.72/1 is known to him to be in any particular person’s hand writing. He now says). “It is in the hand-writing of Mr. Samad, the Accountant”. They entry of payment and the signature marked as P.W.72/4 at page 6 of the Register are also in the hand of Mr. Samad, the Accountant. The two signatures and endorsement of payment at page 9 of the Register now marked as Ext. P.W.72/5 and 72/6, are also of Mr. Samad, the Accountant. The endorsement of payment and signature marked as Ext. P.W.72/8, the entry marked as Ext. P.W.54/5 and the entry marked as Ext. P.W.72/9 I find the signature of Mr. Samad, our Accountant, also at page 49 of the Register on entries marked as Ext. P.W.72/10 and P.W.72/11. (The witness was shown two other entries in the Register P.W.43/4 now marked as Ext. P.W.72/12 and P.W.72/13 and asked to say in whose hand-writing these were. He states). The hand-writing looks like Samad’s but the signatures are not his. The entries were shown to me, Ext. P.W.54/12, is signed at the end by Mr. Samad, the Accountant. The signatures were shown to me in the Register P.W. 43/3, now marked as Ext. P.W.72/14, are these of Mr. Samad, the Accountant. The entry is shown to me Ext. P.W.5475, is also signed by the same Accountant, Mr. Samad. The entry now marked as Ext. P.W.72/15, in the same Register, is also signed by Mr. Samad, the Accountant.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
The entries against Exts. P.W.72/2 and 72/3, relate to the keeping of accounts of credit parties to whom books of accounts are supplied for taking petrol on credit. Initially, the entries are made on the basis of the counterfoils for drawing petrol and when the payment is made then the endorsement is made to the effect that the amount was paid and is signed by the accountant. The amounts are again entered into another ledger showing payment. Those ledgers are known as credit ledgers. These ledgers are called Khatians in Bengali. These payments used to be received by the assistants who were present at the relevant time and were then passed on to the manager who deposited the same in the bank account. The manager of this petrol pump is Anisur Rahman Mahmood. These endorsements were marked and signed by M. A. Samad means
Page: 71
that Samad himself was present and received the cash himself and passed it on to the Manager. This register shows that staff and officers of the consulate of China, Iran, Indonesia and others, also took petrol from the pump. This register Ext. P.W.54/2 also shows that an account appears with regard to the supply of petrol on credit to P.N. Ojha, First secretary. The amount in relation to him was received by me and not by Samad. (The entry is marked Ext. DM/1.) Samad was not in our petrol pump at the time when this bill was paid. Samad left our petrol pump towards the end of 1966. Possibly in the month of November, Samad was employed in our petrol pump up to September, 66. This is also shown by entries in this register Ext. P.W.43/2. When Samad joined our petrol pump I was not there. By that I mean that I was away, being ill I have served under Samad in all for about 2/3 months. I find one entry in the name of one, Mr. Brandreth. I do not know who this person is. Many foreigners, as well as East Pakistanis used to take petrol from our pump on this credit system.
I know Nurul Islam. He is now our accountant in the petrol pump. He joined after the departure of Samad. We are dealers of the Burmah Eastern. Our pump used to sell 100 % Octane as well as petrol.
In 1966 our petrol pump was the only firm which used to supply 100% Octane in the locality. At the initial stage, 100 % Octane used to be supplied to our firm only in tins and not in drums. We stopped supplying petrol and octane to the Indian Deputy High Commission staff as they only wanted to take 100 % Octane. Subsequently, because of the request of our principals, the Burmah Eastern, we were compelled to supply them petrol and octane. We established a pump for octane in 1967 but I do not remember the month.
Mr. A. F. Rahman did not do anything in connection with the running of the petrol pump personally. There was no arrangement for his sitting in the petrol pump. I was examined by the police in January, 1968 at the Special Branch office in the Central Secrétariat. I was subsequently examined at the Dacca Cantt. by the police. I was examined in the room of Major Naser and then I was taken to the adjoining Bar Room. I was interrogated there also. In that room, I saw some people drinking. In
Page: 72
another portion of the room, I found some 25 whips arranged serially. There were a table and some chairs also on one side of the room. I gave a written statement there against my wishes. Major Naser took that statement. There was a Bengali officer also. I do not know his name.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
Major Naser himself gave me his name and told me to come to him to make a statement that office of the Special Branch in the Central Secretariat is near the Ramna Park.
(No other counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 73
CORRECTION
12.11.1968 :
The statement of P.W.72, A. K. Roy has been read over to him and interpreted in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 74
DEPOSITION OF P.W.73, MR. MOKARRAM HOSSAIN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Mokarram Hossain, son of Alhaj Mosharraf Hossain, aged about 42 years, by faith Muslim, of village Damla, P.S. Srinager, District Dacca, at present Chief Accountant of Banking, National Bank of Pakistan, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca.
I am the Chief Accountant of the National Bank of Pakistan, local office, Dacca, since February 1967. Previous to that I was Manager National Bank of Pakistan, Faridpur. Police seized one Ledger, one Savings Bank Account Opening Form, one Ledger Continuation Card and also one Savings Vouchers, from our bank in my presence. On three occasions police seized the papers from our Bank. The police seized papers by this Seizure List, marked Ext. P.W.73/1, in my presence and I signed it. This Ledger Book was seized from our bank, marked Ext. P.W.73/2. This ledger is maintained in our bank in the Official course of business. Page 203 of the ledger shows in account in the name of Mujibur Rahman. (This page is marked Ext. P.W.73/3). This is a Savings Bank Account. This is the ledger card in connection with the mechanization of the account pertaining to this account. (This is marked Ext. P.W.73/4). This is authenticated by an Officer of the Bank. The account in the ledger is authenticated with regard to each entry by initials of a Bank Official.
The police also seized an account opening form by this seizure list marked Ext. P.W.73/5. This bears my signature. This is that account opening form which was seized by the seizure list. Ext. P.W.15/9. This account opening form was filled on behalf of Mujibur Rahman.
Page: 75
One savings bank credit voucher was seized from our bank by the police by this seizure list. (The seizure list is marked Ext. P.W. 73/6). This bears my signature. This is that savings bank credit voucher which was seized by the police. (This is marked Ext. P.W.73/7).
CROSS – EXAMINATION.
TO MR. JAHIRUDDIN AHMED: .
THE occupation of the person who filed this account opening form Ext. P.W.15/9 is mentioned as “business-transport contract”. I sit in a separate room in the National Bank of Pakistan. That is located in one corner of the local office. The General Counter is away from my room. The ledgers are maintained by the ledger keeper.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 76
CORRECTION
12.11.1968 :
P.W.73, Mr. Mokarram Hossain has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
At page 780, in the 2nd line of my deposition, it should be April instead of “February”. The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 77
DEPOSITION OF P.W.74, ZIAUR RAHMAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Ziaur Rahman, son of late Matiur Rahman, aged 40 years, by faith a Muslim, now I am residing at 5/1, Kali Charan Shaha Road, P.S. Sutrapur Dist. Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I am posted in the National Bank of Pakistan at Narayanganj Branch as an Accountant since 13th September, 1968. Prior to that, I was posted in the National Bank of Pakistan, local office, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca, from 1967. Police seized some documents and papers from our Bank and prepared a seizure list in my presence. The seizure list Ext. P.W.73/1 bears my signature. This Account Ledger Book, Ext. P.W.73/2, was seized by the seizure list, Ext. P.W.73/1. Police seized papers from our Bank in my presence on 3 occasions. This seizure list marked Ext. P.W. 74/1 also was prepared in my presence and I signed it. This cheque marked Ext. P.W.15/7, was seized by the seizure list I have just mentioned. Police seized some cheques from our Bank by the seizure list, now marked as Ext. P.W.74/2, in my presence. This seizure list bears my signature. This cheque now marked as Ext. P.W.74/3, was seized by the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.74/2. The statement of savings Bank Account Card marked as Ext. P.W.73/4, was also seized in my presence and was entered in the seizure list.
Page: 78
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 74, ZIAUR RAHMAN TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN:
This cheque, Ext. P.W.15/7, was issued on behalf of the Keya Furniture Mart. This is a business cheque. The cheque Ext. P.W.74/3 and the cheque Ext. P.W.15/7 were not signed by the same individual as the signatures differ.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 79
CORRECTION
12.11.1968:
P.W.74, Ziaur Rahman has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 80
DEPOSITION OF P.W.75, G.M.M. HABIBUR RAHMAN
KHAN ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is G.M.M. Habibur Rahman Khan, son of Motahar Ali Khan, aged 28 years, by faith a Muslim of village Singarkati, P.S. Kotwali, District Barisal.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
Since 1964 I am working in the National Bank of Pakistan, Local Office, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca, previously as Supervisor and now as a Junior Officer Assistant Accountant. Police seized papers and documents from our Bank in my presence on 3 occasions. By this seizure list marked as Ext. P.W.73/5, police seized one Account Deposit Form, from our Bank in my presence. This seizure list bears my signature. This Account Deposit Form, Ext P.W.15/9 was seized by the police in my presence. By this seizure list, already marked as Ext. P.W.26/7, the police seized a Savings Bank Credit Voucher and one Short in my presence. This bears my signature. By this seizure list, already marked as Ext. P.W.26/7, the police seized a Savings Bank Credit Voucher and one Short Credit Register in my presence and I signed this seizure list. This is the Short Credit Register, already marked as Ext. P.W.26/3. The Credit Voucher already marked as Ext. P.W.26/5, was the one which was seized on that occasion.
(None of the Defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 81
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS:
12.11.1968..
Present :
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman.
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before.
For the Defence: As before.
Accused Present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 75, G.M.M. HABIBUR RAHMAN KHAN.
(None of the Defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 82
CORRECTION
12.11.1968 :
P.W.75, G. M. M. Habibur Rahman Khan has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
In the first sentence of my statement instead of “Since 1964” it should be written “Since 24.12.63”. In the 7th line, instead of “account Deposit Form” it should be “Account Opening Form”. The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 83
DEPOSITION OF P.W.76, MD. YUNUS ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Yunus, son of late Mvi Rajab Ali, aged 39 years, by faith a Muslim, now I am residing at 1-25, Block ‘E’, Mohammadpur, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I am an Accountant in the National Bank of Pakistan, Local Office, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca, from August, 1966. The police seized certain documents from my Bank in my presence. The seizure list Ext. P.W. 74/1 was prepared at that time in my presence and I signed it. I see my signatures on it. The cheque Ext. P.W. 15/7 is one of the documents that was seized on that occasion and it is entered in the seizure list.
(None of Defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 84
CORRECTION
12.11.1968.
P.W. 76, Md. Yunus has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 85
DEPOSITION OF P.W.77, REZA RABBANI ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is Reza Rabbani, son of late Mvi. Hussainuddin, aged 60 years, by faith a Muslim, I am now residing at 82, Laboratory Road, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN.
House No. 80 as numbered previously and now numbered No. 81, Laboratory Road, Dhanmondi, Dacca is a building of mine and I let out that house to Mr. Ali Reza in March, 1967 at Rs. 275/- per month. The police searched that house in my presence and seized certain documents. The seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.77/1 was prepared on that occasion and I signed it. The rent receipt book Ext. P.W.77/2 was one of the documents seized then. The counterfoils in this book are in my hand writing and were signed by me. (The written out counterfoils numbering 6 are referred to in this book).
CROSS- EXAMINATION OF P.W.77, REZA RABBANI.
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN:
The house is a one-storied building. Besides the bathroom, there are 3 rooms in that house, two bedrooms and one drawing room. There is no garage in this house. This house has a separate boundary wall and on one side is fencing. The fencing in on the east side and I reside on that side. This house may be 400 or 500 yards from the main Dacca-Aricha Road. On the northern side of the house is the Laboratory Road. One Ali Husain lives on the western side of that house. He lives in a thatched hut.
Pagee: 86
There is no road between that hut and this rented house. On the northern side across the road is the Science Laboratory. I cannot say how many members of Mr. Reza’s family lived in that house. Once I saw his father there. I also know that his brother lived there. The younger brother had also his family there.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN.
(Note:- The counterfoils proved by the prosecution are now marked as Ext. P.W.77/3-8). The rest of the counterfoils of Ext. P.W.77/2 are written in the hand of my son.
P.W.77/4 does not bear any signature. However, the writing in it is mine. There is also no date on this. P.W.77/5 is not signed by me but it is signed by my son-in-law on my behalf. This also bears no date.
P.W.7716 contains my hand-writing but it does not bear my address. Nor does P.W.77/7 bear the name of the land-lord. P.W.77/8 also bears no signature or date. It is not correct to say that these counterfoils are prepared by me later at the instance of the Police and these are not the original counterfoils.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 87
CORRECTION
12.11.1968.
P.W.77, Reza Rabbani has read over his statement and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 88
DEPOSITION OF P.W.78, KUDRUTULLAH BHUIYAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Kudrutullah Bhuiyan, son of Mvi. Shirabdi Bhuiyan, aged 40 years, by faith a Muslim, now residing at 13, Green Square, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN.
13, Green Square, Dacca, belongs to me. I rented out this house to Mr. Lutful Huda in the first part of 1966 at Rs. 290/- per mensem. A rent document was drawn up. The document Ext. P.W.15/3 is the deed that was drawn up and bears my signature, at the end. I myself reside in Serajganj. This document remained with my brother who was living in 13, Green Square, his name is A. K. Fazlul Huq.
TO COURT :
The change in the first paragraph of this deed in the name was made later on after I had signed the original deed, but not in my presence. My brother told me about that later and that is why I know that there was some change. I do not know when the change was actually made.
Page: 89
CORRECTION
13.11.68.
P.W.78, Mr. Kudratullah Bhuiyan has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 90
DEPOSITION OF P.W.79, A. K. FAZLUL HUQ ON SOLEMN
My name is A K. Fazlul Huq, son of late Mvi. Sadat Ali Khan, aged 30 years, by faith a Muslim, now residing at 13, Green Square, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
Mr. Kudrutullah Bhuiyan, my brother, is the owner of 13, Green Square, Dacca. This house was let out to Mr. Lutful Huda and Mujibur Rahman in April or May, 1966. The police came to 13, Green Square and in my presence seized this rent deed Ext. P.W. 15/3. The seizure list was prepared in my presence and I signed in it. I see my signature on the seizure list Ext. P.W. 15/4. The deed was lying in the house and I live in it about three months after the house was rented out, the names in the first paragraph of the deed Ext. P.W. 15/3 were changed by Mujibur Rahman in my presence. Mujibur Rahman told me that they wanted to change these names with the consent of Lutful Huda for their own accounts. I see the signatures on page 4 of the deed Ext. P.W.15/3 pointed out to me. These are signatures of Mujibur Rahman who signed in my presence. (The signatures are now marked Ext. P.W.79/1). (The witness was asked whether he could identify Mujibur Rahman in the dock. He went near the dock and then stated that he could not point him out).
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN.
I was not present when the document was originally drawn up.
Page: 91
TO MR. ABDUL MOMEN.
I did not obtain any writing from Lutful Huda authorising this change.
TO COURT.
Lutful Huda was present when the change was made. No other learned Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be correct.
Page: 92
CORRECTION
13.11.1968.
P.W.79, A. K. Fazlul Huq has read over his statement to himself and now states that his statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page:93
DEPOSITION OF P.W.80, A. WAZED ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name Md. A. Wazed son of Abdul Aziz aged 25 years. I am a resident of 25/4 Abyssina Line, Karachi.
I am a stenographer in the Ministry of Defence at Karachi since 1962. I reside at 25/4 Abyssina Lines, Karachi. M.A. Jalil, my brother is a Naib Subedar in the Army. This house was allotted to me in 1963. Before that my elder brother, Abdul Jalil, was occupying it. On the right hand side of this house is the house No. 25/3. This house No. 25/3 was occupied by Nur Khan, Sergeant in the P.A. F., in 1965. At the end of 1966, it came to be occupied by Flt. Sgt. Mofizullah of the Air Force. In 1967 he shifted from this quarter. Mofizullah used to live with his family in this quarter. I was not on visiting terms with Flt. Sgt. Mofizullah. At that time, when Mofizullah was living there he had no beard, he was clean shaved.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
(The witness’s attention was drawn to his police statement to the effect that Flt. Sgt. Mofizullah came to that quarter in 1967).
He now says – I did so state to the police. The correct statement, however, is that he came to that quarter at the end of 1966, in November or December. At the time, I made the statement to the police, I did not know the exact year when he came there.
Page: 94
TO COURT.
(On being asked how he came to know that Mofizullah came at the end of 1966, the witness says) – after receiving the summons, the summons from this court I discussed with my family on this point and then learnt that he came in 1966.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN :
I was examined by the police only once, 4/5 months from today. I cannot remember the exact month. I was called to Mofizullah is quarter, 25/3, and examined by the police. I originally belong to Bangalore in India. My quarter consisted of 2 rooms in that Block. There are 9 quarters in the Block in which my quarter is situated. There is a veranda in front of the quarters as well as on the back. The quarters are all in one row. There is only row of quarters. There are tole roofs over these quarters. I lived with my family in my quarter.
At the time when I was examined by the police, my family was also in my quarter. A police Inspector had called me to the quarter of Mofizullah for examination.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be correct.
Page: 95
CORRECTION
13.11.1968.
P.W.80, Mr. A. Wajed has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 96
DEPOSITION OF P.W.81, MR. M.M. SYEED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is M. M. Syeed, son of late Abdul Waheed aged 46. I reside at 11/2, Mahajanpur Lane, Dacca.
I am the Manager of Hotel Green. I am also Lessee of that hotel. Nawab Aysia Begum is the owner of the building. There was a T.I. parade in the Kurmitola Area which I was called to attend. I went to that parade twice. A Magistrate was supervising the parade. About 20 or 30 men were included in that parade. On both the days that I attended, I identified two persons on the first day. They were Mr. Manik Chaudhury and Mr. Bidhan Sen. They had come and stayed in my hotel earlier. They came and stayed there on many occasions. I also identified one person on the second day. He was Dr. Saidur Rahman who had stayed in my hotel. He also frequently stayed in my hotel.
TO COURT.
I cannot remember the dates on which the parades were held.
(The witness correctly identified Manik Chowdhury and Bidhan sen in the dock).
CROSS-EXAMINATION: (P.W. 81)
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
I was not examined by the police at any time. Not even after the parade, I was questioned. One police officer came and took me away from the hotel to the T. I. Parade. I think it was a week earlier that I had been told that I would be called to a parade. We maintain a register for
Page: 97
boarders in the hotel. No one could stay in the hotel without registering his name. The names and particulars of the boarders and guests are entered in the hotel register by the boarder’s themselves. (At this stage the defence Counsel asked accused Mafizullah to stand up in the dock. The witness was asked whether Mafizullah has a beard or is clean shaved. The witness says). He is clean shaved. The boarder is expected to fill in all the columns in the register. Only the date of departure and the destination of departure are sometimes written by the hotel Management
Md. Shafiq
I find in the entry Ext. P.W.5/1 relating to Dr. Saeedur Rahman in the register Ext. P.W. 5/2, that all the columns against him are not filled up. I find an entry on page 119 of this hotel register, in the name of Dr. Rahman. I cannot say to whom it relates. His father’s name is given in the entry as A.K. Choudhury, I cannot say to whom this entry relates. I cannot say from merely reading the entries in this register as to which person is referred to in them. Sometimes I myself and sometimes another Assistant of mine are present when entries are made in the register by the boarders. Mr. Faizur Rahman is my Assistant.
I find at page 116 of this register that after the Serial No. 1795, the next serial number is 1796 and then 1797.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN:
I have known Mr. Manik Choudhury for the last two years. I find from the entries against his name that he is a business man. Once Manik Choudhury had transferred some money from Chittagong to my account in the Muslim Commercial Bank, Nawabpur Branch, Dacca in order to pay his hotel bills. I cannot remember the year or the month in which the payment was made. I do not even remember the amount. I cannot recall whether this amount was in thousand figure. I cannot remember if this
Page: 98
was done by him more than once. I have a current account in that bank but I cannot remember its number because I am not operating the account now. I have also got a savings account there. I cannot remember when I opened that current account. I do not remember even approximately the year in which that was opened. I took the lease of the Green Hotel in 1954. I cannot remember how many years after I opened that current account but it was long after the starting of the hotel. It may be that he brought Rs. 4,000/- on one occasion and Rs. 3,000/ – on another occasion into my current account in the Muslim Commercial Bank.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
13.11.1968.
P.W.81, M. M. Syed has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 99
DEPOSITION OF P.W.82. MD. WALI AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
(As the witness does not know English Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar will interpret his evidence).
My name is Md. Wali Ahmed, son of Abdul Aziz, aged 25 years, by faith Muslim of village Naraharipur, P.S. Laksum, District Comilla.
I reside in 31, Peari Das Road, Bangla Bazar, Dacca. The police did take some documents from a house in Abhoydas Lane in my presence. I see my signatures on the seizure List Ext. P.W.70/1. This was on the 9th of February, 1968. The police seized four or five papers on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN:
Abhoydas Lane is within Sutrapur Police Station. The people living in 13, Abhoydas Lane are my neighbours in my village and I used to come to see them. I went to meet them in the middle of February this year. The owner of the house Mr. Waliullah called me at the time of the search. The police did take certain documents in my presence.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in a cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 100
CORRECTION
13.11.1968
The deposition of P.W.82, Mr. Wali Ahmed has been read over to him and interpreted in Bengali. He states that his statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 101
DEPOSITION OF P.W.83, S.A. QUADIR ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is S. A. Quadir, son of Mr. Abdul Alim, aged 50 years, by faith a Muslim, I am residing at 64, PECHS, Karachi.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN:
I am working as Assistant Estate Officer, Accounts, Estate Office, Karachi under the Central Govt. since 1st January, 1967.
In March, 1964 a flat No. 21 in the Ilaco House, Victoria Road, Karachi was allotted to Mr. A.F. Rahman, CSP, Deputy Financial Adviser, Ministry of Health, Govt. of Pakistan, Karachi. This is the office copy of the allotment letter in his favour, now marked as Ext. P.W.83/1. We received a letter from him on the 2nd March, 1967 intimating that he had vacated that flat and asking us to take possession of that flat from his servant, Shahidul Huq. This is a hand-written letter. (The letter is marked as Ext. P.W. 83/2.) This is another letter addressed to us by Mr. A.F. Rahman purporting to be written & signed by him. (It is marked as Ext. P.W. 83/3). I have produced this from my office file. In my record, there is another letter purporting to be signed by him, now marked as Ext. P.W. 83/4. These are rent cards which were taken over by the Police from my records. They are 4 in number and now marked as Ext. P.W. 83/5-8. I find no other papers in my file concerning Mr. A.F. Rahman with reference to this flat.
Page: 102
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.83, S.A. QUADIR: TO MR. ZAMIRUDDIN:
The Exts P.Ws. 83/2 and 83/3 purport to have been addressed from Dacca. Our records show that Mr. A.F. Rahman did not pay the rent after April, 1966. If any reminders were sent for payment of rent after April, 1966 there is no record of that in my file because only demand statements are sent. The office copy of any such demand statement is not with me at present. I will have not brought the whole file. Our records will not show to which address this demand statement, if any, was sent. But our practice is to send the bills to the official address. The official address of Mr. A. F. Rahman was, “Deputy Financial Advisor, Ministry of Health”. Up to March, 1967, Mr. A. F. Rahman was on record as Deputy Financial Advisor of Health and his bills were sent to him and to the ADPR, Ministry of Health. From our records, it appears that there are outstanding arrears of the house rent against Mr. Rahman.
(No other defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 83, S.A. QUADER ON RECALL:
(Mr. T.H. Khan has requested that P.W.83, Mr. S. A. Quadar be recalled as he has to examine this witness with regard to another house in Karachi. He is allowed to be recalled).
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I have got the office copy of the allotment certificate order in respect of 4/14-G, Clayton Road, Karachi. I produce it (It is marked Ext. P.W.83/9). This was allotted to Mrs. Jahan Ara Jalil. Her husband’s name is not given but she is described as Assistant Teacher, Bengali Boys and Girls Primary School, Jahangir Road East. We only allot quarters to Govt. servants and she
Page: 103
must be a Govt. Servant. She vacated the quarter on 11.8.68 according to my record, and after that, the quarter was allotted to her husband’s brother on the condition that she would also be staying in the same quarter. I produce her declaration to that effect. (This is now marked Ext. P.W.83/10). I also produce another letter from her addressed to the Additional Estate Officer now marked Ext. P.W.83/11 about the same quarter.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: TO MR. JAHIRUDDIN AHMED:
I never met this lady personally. Nor I even visited her quarter. Really speaking, she never vacated the quarter. Only in August, 1968 the allotment was changed to her husband’s brother. This quarter is on Clayton Road, Karachi. I do not know the actual location of the quarters known as Clayton quarters because I am only working as Accounts Officer and I am not Estate Officer. I cannot say, therefore, how many quarters there are on Clayton Road. I joined this Department only on 1st January, 1967. The police were supplied copies of these documents by Mr. Jan who is Assistant Estate Officer. He works in our office. The original allotment order to the allottee and we retain the office copy.
TO MR. ABDUL MOMEN: NIL.
TO MR, ABDULLAH:
There is a category of persons from East Pakistan who may be allotted some of the Government quarters on the recommendation of the East Pakistan Association though they may not be Government servants. I do not think there is any such an exception in favour of others.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 104
CORRECTION
13.11.68.
P.W.83, Mr. S. A. Kuadir has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
At page 806, in the second line of the statement, my age should be 58 instead of 50.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 105
DEPOSITION OF P.W.84, GULE JAWAHER ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is Gule Jawaher s/o. Syeed Jawaher, aged 24, house No. 81.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I am Post Master, Manera Post Office, Karachi, since 12th December, 1967. I have brought some records from my post office. My record shows that on 18.8.65 a money order was received for payment to Nur Mohmmad for Rs. 5000/-. The money was remitted by M. Rahman. It was sent from Tejgaon Airport Post Office in East Pakistan. It was a telegraphic money order. I produce the telegraphic advice now marked’ Ext. P.W. 84/1 and this is the postal confirmation of this telegraphic money order, now marked Ext. P.W.84/2. My records also show that this money order was delivered to the payee on the 28th August, 1965 at 11.55 hours. (The entry in the original record has been seen by the Court & returned. I produce the post-man’s book concerning payment of this money order. (The relevant entry is marked Ext. P.W.84/2). This Postman’s book belongs to Gauhar Rahman, Postal peon who made payment of the money order.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN:
I do not have any acknowledgment receipt with me as it is sent to the head office and from there to the Audit Office. In 1965 I was posted in
Page: 106
some other post office in Karachi, but I do not exactly remember which. Most probably in June or July, 1965, I came to Manora Post Office as a clerk. I was promoted to the rank of post master of this post office on 12th December, 1967. There were only two clerks in Manora post office. The documents that I have exhibited do not contain any entries in my hand. Gauhar Rahman is working as Postman in Manora post office even now. I supplied certified copies of some of our documents to the police.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be correct.
Page: 107
DEPOSITION OF P.W.85, ABDUS SOBHAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Abdus Sobhan s/o. Himmat Ali aged 30 years, I am residing at 36/12, F.Blook, Mohammadpur, Dacca.
TO MR. T.H.KHAN:
The police seized some papers from driver Nawan Ali in my presence. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. The Seizure List is marked Ext. P.W.85/1. It bears my signature. This is the paper now marked Ext. P.W.85/2 which was seized by the police, by preparing the above seizure list. This document also bears my signature, on the reverse.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: TO MR. JAHIRUDDIN AHMED:
The paper was taken from Nawab Ali at the Babupura Police Outpost. I reside at 36/12, Block-F, Mohammadpur Housing Estate. There are a number of shops near the Babupura outpost. Mohammadpur is about three miles away from Babupura outpost.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
TO MR. T. H. KHAN IN RE-EXAMINATION
I have a shop in front of the Babupura police Outpost.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 108
CORRECTION
13.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.85, Abdus Sobhan has been read over to him and interpreted in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and he now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 109
DIPOSITION OF P.W.86, AMINUDDIN ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is Aminuddin, son of late Najimuddin, aged 47 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at 225, Santibagh, P.S. Ramna, Dacca.
I am Supervisor, Telephone Revenue Accounts posted at P.M.G. Building, Dacca since the partition. In my presence police seized some trunk-call tickets from our office and prepared Seizure List. This is the Seizure List now marked Ext. P.W.86/2-8 were seized per the above seizure list. These trunk-call tickets are maintained in our office in due course of official business. These trunk-call tickets relate to particular person calls. Ext. P.W.86/2 relates to Lt. Moazzem Hossain from Dacca phone No. 82431 to Karachi phone No. 41195. Ext. P.W.86/3 relates to particular person Lt. Moazzem Hossain from Dacca phone No. 82431 to Karachi phone No. 41195, Ext. P.W. 86/4 relates to particular person Lt. Moazzem Hossain from Dacca phone 82431 to Karachi phone No. 41195. Ext. P.W.86/5 relates to particular person Lt. Moazzem Hossain from Dacca phone No 82431 to Karachi phone No. 41195. Ext. P.W.8676 relates to particular person Lt. Moazzem Hossain from Dacca phone No. 82452 to Karachi phone No. 41195. Ext. P.W.86/7 relates to particular person Lt. Moazzem Hossain from Dacca phone No. 82452 to Karachi phone No. 41195. Ext. P.W.86/8 relates to particular person Lt. Moazzem Hossain from Dacca phone No. 82452 to Karachi phone No. 41195. Ext. P.W. 86/2 relates to a call dated 5.3.66. Ext. P.W. 86/3 relates to a call dated 7.3.66. Ext. P.W.8676 relates to a call dated 7.3.66. Ext. P.W. 86/5 relates to a call dated 7.3.66. Ext. P.W.86/6 relates to a call dated 26.3.66. Ext. P.W.86/7 relates to call dated 27.3.66, Ext. P.W.86/8 relates to a call dated 30.3.66. CROSS-EXAMINATION:
Page: 110
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
Record of Proceedings
13.11.1968.
Present:
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman.
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member
For the prosecution ……… As before.
For the defence ………. As before.
Accused present ………. As before.
Witness on oath ……….. As before.
CROSS- EXAMINATION OF P.W. 86, MR. AMINUDDIN. TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED:
I am working on the revenue side of our organisation. Without seeing the ledger I cannot say whether payment has been made for all these telephone calls which I mentioned in my statement. The entries in the tickets show that these did mature. Ext. P.W.86/2 was handed over to the witness and he was asked to say whether the call mentioned therein is matured. After seeing the documents P.W.86/2 the witness says ‘yes’ it did mature according to the entries. The entries show that at 17.40 hours the P.P. was not available but he became available at 18.15 hours. The
Page: 111
call evidenced by Ext. P.W.86/3 I now find did not mature. It was an effective call. My answer is the same with regard to Ext. P.W.86/4. The position is the same with regard to the call Ext. P.W.86/6. In Ext. P.W.86/7 the entries show that the P.P. was not available and somebody else must have spoken. The same is the position in Ext. P.W. 86/8. In Ext. P.W. 86/2 also the P.P. himself was not available but somebody else might have spoken and the call matured. These tickets are originally kept with the telephone operators on the line. Within a week these tickets would be passed down to our office. There is a group in our office who prepares the bills for a collection of charges. The bill for charge is issued by the 15″ of the next month after the month in which the calls were made. I do not know whose number the Karachi number mentioned in these Exts. is.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
13.11.68.
P.W.86, Mr. Aminuddin has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 112
DEPOSITION OF P.W.87, ABDUL FATEH SIDDIQUE ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Abdul Fateh Siddiqui, son of late Abdul Malek Siddiqui, aged 30 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at 9/11, Mohammadpur, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
DECLINED.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 113
DEPOSITION OF P.W.88, ABDUL MANNAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Abdul Mannan, son of Kala Khan, aged 30 years, by faith Muslim., at present residing in PIA staff quarters, Airport, Dacca, 23-H, Block-D.
I am working as a Technical Clerk in the M.T. Section of the PIA, Dacca. On 5.3.68 a Police Officer went to our office. The police seized one Dodge Dart car along with the relevant car diaries in my presence. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see that seizure list here, now marked Ext. P.W.88/1. This bears my signature.
TO COURT:
The diaries I have mentioned are the log books of the car, and they were in the car itself.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
The number of the car is KAE 3194 and that shows that it was registered in Karachi. The Dacca number of the car is also mentioned in the Seizure List. There was no Chittagong registered number of the car. I cannot say when this car was received by the PIA in Dacca. I cannot say for how long a period this car was used outside Dacca. (No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine this witness.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 114
CORRECTION
14.11.68.
P.W.88, Abdul Mannan has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
At page 819 it is recorded in my statement that the diaries of the Log Books were in the car but they were actually not in the car. They were made available on the next day.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 115
DEPOSITION OF P.W.89, ABDUR RASHID ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is Abdur Rashid, son of Imajuddin, aged 35 years by faith a Muslim, now residing at 1-C/4/1, Mirpur, Section No. 1, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ALIM
I am a clerk in the PIA M.T. Section, Dacca. A police officer came to our office on 5.3.68 and seized a car No. 3194 (Dodge Dart) in my presence. I signed the seizure list that was prepared. I see the seizure list Ext. P.W.88/1 which was signed by me. I have no personal knowledge of who used this car.
CROSS – EXAMINATION OF P.W. 89, ABDUR RASHID TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
The number which I have given is the Dsvvs Registration Number.
(No other defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 116
CORRECTION
14.11.68.
P.W.89, Abdur Rashid, has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
At page 821 of my statement in the cross-examination, in the 3rd line from the bottom, it is mentioned that the number of the car which I have given was the ‘Dacca Registration Number’ but actually that number is of Karachi.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded,
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 117
DEPOSITION OF P.W.90, A. K. M. JAMALUDDIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A. K. M. Jamaluddin, son of Mr. Abdul Hakim, aged 28 years, by faith a Muslim, now residing at 226-F, Second Capital Staff Quarters, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ALIM
I am an Upper Division Clerk in the Regional Central Statistical Office, Dacca. On 8.3.68, a police officer visited our office and he took possession of the joining report of Amir Husain Mia. I signed the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.90/1. It is signed by me. The paper that was seized on that occasion I see here marked as Ext. P.W.3/58.
(None of the defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Member.
Member
Page: 119
CORRECTION
13.11.1968.
P.W.90, A. K. M. Jamaluddin has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 120
DEPOSITION OF P.W.91, A. B. M. ABDUL KHALEQUE
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is A.B.M. Abdul Khaleque, son of late Al-Haj Abdul Jabber Pandit, aged 33 years, by faith a Muslim, now residing at D-30/G10, Motijheel Staff Quarters, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ALIM
I am an S.A.S, Accountant, in the office of the Deputy Comptroller, Posts, Telegraph, and Telephones, Dacca. On 1.3.68 the police visited our office and seized two telegrams in my presence. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see here the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.91/1. The telegram P.W.5/2 and the telegram now marked as Ext.91/2 are those telegrams which were seized on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN:
After one month of the transmission of the telegram, we get the original of the telegram in our office. I have got two office copies on my record.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN:
THE TELEGRAM Ext, P.W. 4/2 mentioned the sender’s name as “Alam” and his address as “P-74, Azimpur Estates”.
Page: 121
(No other defences counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness). Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
13.11.1968.
P.W.91, A. B. M, Abdul Khaleque has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 122
DEPOSITION OF P.W.92, B. K. S. REAZAT ALI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is B.K.S Reazat Ali, son of Late S. Allah Baksh, aged 44 years, by faith a Muslim, now residing at B-12/G-2, Motijhell Central Government Staff Quarters, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ALIM.
I am an Assistant Accounts Officer, Posts, Telegraphs and Telephone, Dacca. On 1-3-1968 a police visited our office and seized 2 telegrams in my presence. A seizure list was prepared on that occasion which I signed. I see here Ext. P.W.91/1. The 2 telegrams are now marked as Ext. P.W.4/2 and 91/2. These were seized on that occasion. We kept the exact copies of the telegrams for our records before handing over the original to the police.
(None of the defence Counsel wises to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
S. Islam.
Page: 123
CORRECTION
13.11.68.
P.W.92, Mr. Reazat Ali has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement is correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 124
DEPOSITION OF P.W.93, NAZIRUDDIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
(As the witness does not know English Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar will interpret his evidence in Bengali).
My name is Naziruddin, son of Emarat Mia, aged 20 years, by faith a Muslim, residing at 32, Nayapaltan, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ALIM
I was called to witness the search by the police at the premises of arts on photographs. The police seized a Khata from that premises. A seizure list was prepared and I signed it in Bengali. I do not see my signature on the seizure list shown to me, now. The Khata was like this – Again said it is that very Khata now marked as Ext. P.W.93/1 which was taken by the police on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN:
I am a cycle repairer and the owner of a shop near this photographer’s premises. My shop is contiguous to that of the photographer. There are big shops nearby. I am not a staff photographer. I never served in WAPDA. I can only sign my name in Bengali but I am not a literate person. I do not know the alphabet of the English language I cannot read what is written on the Khata, Ext. P.W. 93/1. I have not seen any similar Khata before this. From the label on the Khata book, I
Page: 125
say that this very Khata was seized. There were 2/3 other persons present besides me when the search was made by the police. The search was made between 11 and 11-30 A.M.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN:
I have a sign board in the shop which bears the name of my brother Chand Mia. My brother is the owner of the shop and I serve there. When I saw the Khata with the Police I saw both the labels which are now bear on the Khata. There were 3 police officers in the search. One of those people was in a police uniform and then others were in plain clothes.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
14.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.93, Naziruddin, has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and he now states follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 126
DEPOSITION OF P.W.94, ALI REZA KHAN ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is Ali Reza son of Nuruddin Khan aged 24 years. I reside at 16, Joynag Road, Dacca.
TO MR. ALIM:
I attended a search by the police. The police seized a negative register book in my presence and prepared a seizure list. I see the seizure list here which I signed. The seizure list is now marked Ext. P.W.94/1. I see here the register marked Ext P.W.93/1 that was taken into possession by the police.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
TO MR. JAHIRUDDIN:
– I live in 16, Joynag Road, Dacca, that a within the Lalbagh Police Station. The name of the premises from which the register was seized is “Arts on Photograph” that is in the Motijheel area within Ramna Thana. I cannot read what is written on the label of this register. The words ‘negative register’ do not appear on the title page. My house is about three miles away from this shop.
TO COURT:
(When asked how he happened to be there, the witness says) – I was in my office which is at Motijheel. It is WAPDA Public Relations Office and I work as Photographer there. My office hours are 7-30 A.M. to 1-30 P.M.
TO MR. JAHIRUDDIN:
My office is on the 5th floor of the WAPDA Building. On all the floors of the building, there are employees of WAPDA. I saw only one Police Officer there in the premises of search. He was in plain cloths. I had come to these photographer’s premises from my office to get
Page: 128
photographs on official business and there I found police. There is no record to show that I had official business with the photographer on that day. I did not visit that shop either on the previous day of the search or on the following day. From time to time, I have been visiting that shop almost every day. There is no record to show my dealings with this shop. The police had actually arrived at that shop after I had been there for about half an hour. I was talking to the photographer there during that period. I cannot remember now what official work had taken me to that photographer’s shop. It is not correct to say that I was not present at the search and I signed a seizure list later on.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
13.11.1968
P.W.94, Ali Reza Khan has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 129
DEPOSITION OF P.W.95, MR. MOHAMMAD SIDDIQUE
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Md. Siddique son of Golam Mohammad Siddique aged 26 years. I reside at Z-21, Block-D, Tajmohal Road, Dacca.
TO MR. ALIM:
My wife Khursid Begum is the owner of holding No. 821, Road No. 10, Dhanmondi Residential Area, Dacca. That holding was leased out into Mr. Ali Reza in the month of September 1967. The lease deed was shown to me and marked as Ext. P.W.95/1. I identify the signature of my wife on the document. The police seized this document from the house in my presence and prepared a seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.95/2, which I signed. (The witness correctly pointed out Mr. Ali Reza in the accused dock).
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
The house is no storied building. The land under it is 10 Katas”. It has a lawn in front of it, and the house is enclosed by boundary walls which are more than 6 feet high. The gate is built of G.I. Sheets. In the house, there are two bedrooms, one drawing-cum-dining room, a kitchen, a pantry, and two bathrooms. I do not know how many members of Ali Reza’s family used to reside there, but there were a good number of people. There was no female living in the house. I did not see his mother there.
(No other defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Admitted to be correct.
Page: 130
CORRECTION
13.11.1968.
P.W.95, Md. Siddique has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 131
DEPOSITION OF P.W.96, I.A. FARUQI, ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION:
My name is I.A. Faruqi, son of late Nisar Ahmed Faruqi, aged 58 years. I reside at 7/8, Quaid-E-Azam Road, Mohammadpur Police Station, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination.
Cross-examination: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 133
DEPOSITION OF P.W.97, MR. HARUNAR-AR-RASHID
KHAN ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION:
My name is Harun-ar-Rashid Khan, son of B. A. Khan aged 50 years. I reside at 107, D.N. Sen Road, Dacca.
TO MR. ALIM:
I have retired from service as a subordinate Judge. I know ex-corporal Amir Hossain Mia. He used to stay in my house as a tenant in the year 1966. I had a telephone in that house which was available to him. The number of my telephone is 82452. The house is at 107, D.N. Sen Road, Dacca.
CROSS- EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
The telephone I have mentioned is a listed telephone being regularly authorised. The telephone was there in the house for the last 4/5 years. I gave the house to him for residential purpose. At that time I was posted at Mymensingh. I never authorised the tenant to carry on business in that house. On one occasion I visited Dacca and I found some wheat bags were stored in the house and I objected to it. I asked him to clear out those bags and objected to his carrying on a wheat business.
I think it was towards the end of March, 1966, I let out the premises to him. There is no written agreement for the lease as I did not want to create a tenancy. Nor did I issue any rent receipt to him neither I received rent regularly. The rent used to be adjusted in the payments of
Page: 135
electric bills, telephone bills, Municipal tax, etc. and the rent was not paid every month. I do not remember the amount of municipal tax.
The witness volunteered. I remember he paid in all Rs. 1500/- for months-for the period he occupied the house.
When he let the house he paid in cash whatever was due to me on accounting. Before that, he had made no cash payment but the adjustment was made as I have already mentioned. He left the house towards the end of September, 1966.
I purchased this house perhaps in the year 1961 or 1962. I was transferred to Mymensingh probably in May, 1965. My family was here for some time and subsequently, they joined me in Mymensingh. My family joined me probably after three or four months. I have nine children at Dacca and they joined me after their annual examination. Probably they joined me in November or December that year. My family continued to stay most probably up to December of that year, in that house. There are five main rooms in the house. The telephone was fixed in the south-eastern bed-room of the building. I leased out only two rooms including this south-eastern room where the telephone was located. Though only two rooms were let out still the entire house continued to be an occupation of Mr. Amir Hossain as the other part was vacant. The other rooms were not locked. They were kept open and Amir Hossain utilised those rooms. He also utilized my furniture. There was no record for this lease. Mr. Amir Hossain occupied the house in my absence after he had a talk with me over telephone. At that time, I was at Dacca on a Sunday I came with the permission of my District Judge.
I did not know Mr. Amir Hossain before. He is not related to me. I allowed him to stay in my house and use my rooms and my furniture and telephone after having a talk with him over the phone without knowing him personally and without executing any rent deed because he told me that he was drawing a salary of Rs.1700/- 100/- and he was an exmilitary Officer. I accepted him on his statement. He also told me that he was a bachelor
Page: 136
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN:
I was examined by the Police. Most probably it was in February, 1968. I do not remember if I stated to the police that I allowed Amir Hossain to use my telephone (not recorded). I do not remember it. I stated to the police that the rooms were left out to Amir Hossain including the room with the telephone (not recorded). I do not remember whether I mentioned the telephone in my house to the police at all (not recorded). As long as I was posted at Mymensingh, whenever I used to come to Dacca I used to stay in my own house. One occasion my family came with me to Dacca and they also stayed in that house for two or three days. It is not correct to say that during my stay in Mymensingh my father was seriously ill and I had to transfer him to Dacca and that I kept him in that house. I retired on the 3rd June, 1968 on medical ground.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
13.11.68.
P.W.97, Harun-ar-Rashid Khan has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 137
DEPOSITION OF P.W.98, MR. S.S. MIRZA ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is S.S. Mirza, son of Syed Farooq Mirza, aged 30 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing in 10. Bailey Road Extension, Dacca.
I am the Assistant Manager, Pakistan International Airlines Corporation, Dacca. I am posted in Dacca since 1965, the PIA preserve Passengers’ Manifest for a period of six months from the relevant date. After six months, under the instructions from the Head Office, the Manifest is destroyed. This is the rule followed in the Dacca office but I cannot say with regard to the other stations.
CROSS-EXAMINATION:
TO MR. ABDUL MOMEN:
The document handed over to me is a copy of the PIA – Manifest dated the 29th October, 1967 for Passengers travelling from Dacca to Lahore. In this Manifest serial No.29 relates to Mr. M.R. Quddus. (The entry is now marked Ext. DN/1). The document now handed over to me is a copy of the PIA Manifest dated the 22nd October, 1967 for passengers travelling from Lahore to Dacca. Serial number 52 relates to Mr. M. R. Quddus in Economy class. (The entry is now marked Ext. DN/2)
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED:
A copy of the Manifest Dated the 29th October, 1967 was supplied from our office on 17th September, 1968. This was supplied from the Airport office and not from our City Sales Office. The practice that I mentioned is regarding the City Sales office. The Airport office of the
Page: 138
PIA is under the control of the City Sales office which is the Head Office in East Pakistan. In the same building where the City Sales office is located, there is also an office of the PIA which is known as Area Secretariat. This controls the PIA Eastern Region.
The document now handed over to me is a photostat copy of the PIA Flight Manifest dated the 28th of August, 1965. When two tickets are purchased by an individual for two different passengers, their name will appear in the Manifest on after the other. If a passenger gives his full name, we write his full name on the ticket. The PIA does not maintain a photostat copy of all the manifests. There is no rule of maintaining photostat copies of manifests on any special occasion. There is no rule at all regarding the maintenance of a Photostat copy of a Manifest.
There is a revenue Department in the PIA office and this office maintains the counterfoils of the tickets sold. I cannot say whether these counterfoils are maintained in the accounts office for a period of five years.
I have no idea at all as to how long these counterfoils are preserved in our office. Our Head Office in Karachi will be a date to say as to how long these counterfoils are preserved. We have a sale report where we enter the ticket number and the name. The name is also mentioned there. This sale report is maintained for a period of even more than 3 years.
(The Photostat copy of the manifest shown to the witness is now marked as Ext. DN/3). This document contains names that do not include Moazzem Hossain but some of the names contained herein are not easily legible. Nor does it contain any name reading like Mr. Amir Hussain Mia.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 139
CORRECTION
14.11.1968.
P.W.98, Mr. S. S Mirza has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
My name has been written as ‘S. S. Mirza’. It should be ‘F. H. Mirza’. With regard to my statement on page 842 to the effect that we have a ‘sale report’ wherein we enter the ticket number and name, now I wish to add that the report is known as ‘counter sale report’ and that no names are mentioned in it. This I learnt yesterday after seeing my documents.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 140
DEPOSITION OF P.W.99, NAWAB ALI ON SOLEMN
| AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence in Bengali).
My name is Nawab Ali, son of Atahar Ali, aged 25 years, by ‘faith a Muslim, now residing at Nilkhet Bastee in the residence of Seraj Member, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a motor driver. I got the driving license in 1964. I knew Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed, Director of the Salvage Company under when I served as a driver. I used to drive a jeep for him. The jeep was numbered as ERA 9136. Mr. Kamaludain then used to reside at the house of Mr. K. M. Ahmed in Ram Krishna Mission Road, Dacca. The jeep used to be kept in the residence of Mr. K. G. Ahmed. I heard that Mr. K. G. Ahmed was a distant maternal uncle of Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed.
I also used to live in the house of Mr. K.G. Ahmed while serving under Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed. I knew one Sultanuddin Ahmed, the brother of the wife of Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed. At the time Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed had no beard. (The witness was asked if he could identify Sultanuddin Ahmed in the dock, the witness went near the dock, examined the accused for a few minutes and then said ‘I cannot find him out’) (At this stage Sultanuddin Ahmed was asked to stand up by the Court and he did so. The learned counsel for the prosecution wishes to have it recorded by the Tribunal that Sultanuddin Ahmed is now a bearded man). Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed used to serve in the Army at that
Page: 141
time. When I was serving with Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed, Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed used to reside in Dacca Hotel. I used to drive the jeep on the orders of my master. Kamaluddin Ahmed as well as on the orders of Mr. K.G. Ahmed and on nobody else’s orders. On a particular Saturday towards the close of 1967, Mr. K.G. Ahmed directed me to go with the jeep to the Dacca Hotel and to meet Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed there. Accordingly, I went and met Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed at Dacca Hotel. I waited there till 12-30 in the night and then Sultanuddin Ahmed and another man called, Mujib came to the jeep and asked me to drive to the Airport. I along with these two persons came to the Airport. I faintly remember that Mujib had no beard at that time. (The witness was asked whether he could identify this Mujib in the dock. After examining the accused person in the dock, the witness states, that he cannot identify Mujib). (The prosecution counsel prays that it may be recorded that Std. Mujib has a beard now. This is so noticed by the Tribunal). We went to the Airport and stayed there till 2 A.M. when a plane arrived and 2 gentlemen came by that plane. We all four then travelled in that jeep and went to Road No.2, Dhanmondi, to the house of Dr. A. Khalieque. One of the two persons who came by plane, and got down at the residence of Dr. Khaleque. I had over-heard their talk that the person who got down at Road No. 2 was Mr. Moazzem. I did not see this Mr. Moazzem on any other occasion.
(The witness was asked if he could identify Mr. Moazzem in the dock. The witness went near the dock and examined the accused persons for some time and then stated that he could not identify him). On dropping Mr. Moazzem Hossain at the residence of Dr. Khalique we went back to the Dacca hotel. The name of the other man who came by the plane that night was Amir Hossain, which I learnt later on. Mr. Amir Hossain was a thin man having a bald head. After reaching the Dacca hotel, all the three alighted at the Dacca hotel and I returned to the house of Mr. K. G. Ahmed with the jeep.
At about 8-30 to 9 A.M. on the following morning, Mr. K. G. Ahmed asked me to go to the Dacca hotel with the jeep and see Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed. Accordingly, I went to the Dacca hotel with the jeep and met
Page: 142
Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed. After I reported myself to Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed, all these three persons came and boarded the jeep and along with them I went to the house of Dr. Khaleque. These three persons were Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed, Mujib and Amir Hossain came and also boarded the jeep. After I drove towards the end of Road No 2. in Dhanmandi when Mr. Moazzem Hossain asked me to stop. There Mr. Moazzem asked Mr. Mujib to get down from the jeep and go to the house of Mr. Mujibur Rahman. Then Mujib got down from the jeep and Moazzem Hossain asked us to go to Dacca hotel and we went to the Dacca hotel. At Dacca hotel and all the three persons got down from the jeep and on the orders of Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed, I went with the jeep to the residence of Mr. K. G. Ahmed. The police seized some papers from me. They prepared a seizure list and took away the certificate that was granted by Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed. I see now the seizure list already marked P.W.85/1 and see my signature on it. I also see the certificate granted to me by Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed, already marked Ext. P.W. 85/2. This bears my signature on the reverse. This is the very document that was seized by the police.
Page: 143
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
14.11.1968.
Present:
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman.
Mr. justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the prosecution …….. As before.
For the defence …….. As before.
Accused present ……….. As before.
Witness on oath……… As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.99, NAWAB ALI CONTINUED TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
I had been serving Mr. Kamaluddin for 8/10 months prior to August, 1965 as a driver. I had obtained a certificate from Mr. Kamaluddin. I used to drive a jeep before he gave me the certificate. I am not aware when Kamaluddin Ahmed was taken away by the Police. I did not make any enquiry at the Dacca hotel or at the house of Mr. K. G. Ahmed to find out where Mr. Kamaluddin had gone. In December, 1967, I was working as a driver with Mr. Salam, Director of Eastern Mercantile Bank. I cannot remember the date or month when I took up his service. I do not know what happened to the jeep or who was driving the jeep in December, 1967. I do not know that in December, 67 an investigation into this Agartala Case had been started and several
Page: 144
persons had been arrested. None of the members of the families of Kamaluddin or Mr. K.G. Ahmed met me after December, 67. I have not met Mr. Kamaluddin until now. Nor have I met Mr. K.G. Ahmed during this period. I had left the house of Mr. K. G. Ahmed when Mr. Kamaluddin’s wife returned from Karachi. I cannot remember the date or the month. I had made over the charge of the jeep to Mr. Kamaluddin himself when I left.
The Police had interrogated me about 7/8 months back. I did not know where Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed or his family was at that time. I did not mention that I had taken the jeep of Kamaluddin to the Airport and brought passengers from there at any time to anyone else besides the police and the Magistrate. It was at the house Dr. Naimur Rahman of Eastern Mercantile Bank with whom I was then serving, that the Police interrogated me. After leaving the service of Kamaluddin, I had taken up service with the ‘Khwaja Auto Rickshaw’ before taking service with Mr. Salam. I did not tell either Mr. Kamaluddin or Mr. K.G. Ahmed that I would be taking service with the Khwaja Auto Rickshaw. Nor did I leave an address with them. Mr. Naimur Rahman did not tell me before the police met me, that they would be calling on me at his house. After that occasion when they interrogated me, the police had met me once and taken the certificate from me. They did not interrogate me on the second occasion. The certificate was taken from me by the police at Babupura Police out-post while I was serving with Mr.Naimur Rahman. The Police sent me there. A police man came to the house of Mr. Naimur Rahman and told me that I should present myself at the outpost the next day with the certificate. The certificate had been given to me by Kamaluddin Ahmed when I left the service. After taking the certificate from Kamaluddin Ahmed, I showed it to my next employer. It was 2/3 days after my interrogation by the police that the police came and called me to the outpost. I did not go to Mr. Kamaluddin or to any of his relatives after my interrogation by the police to tell them about this. It is not correct that Kamaluddin or Mr. K. G. Ahmed had asked me to make a statement to the police in order to defend them.
Page: 145
Mr. K.G. Ahmed also used this jeep which I kept at his residence. I think Mr. K.G. Ahmed was Chairman of the Salvage Corporation at that time. At that time Mr. K.G. Ahmed had no car but a jeep of his own.
I am a bachelor. I used to stay in a separate servant’s quarter in the house of Mr. K.G. Ahmed when I lived there. On the first occasion when the police met me, they took me from the house of Mr. Zaimur Rahman to Rajarbagh Police centre and interrogated me there. I was kept there only for an hour and a half, at the centre one day. No one else had gone with me to the centre. I was not detained by the police after that. It is not correct that the police have been paying me Rs. 100/- per month after in this court. I now reside in the Nilkhet Basti. I live in the house of Member Seraj and not in a Government quarter. I am not aware of any police outpost in that Basti. It is not correct that I have been kept there by the police under surveillance. Siraj is a B.D. member and not related to me.
I do not remember the date when I was produced to the Magistrate for my statement. I made the statement to the Magistrate in his chamber in the court building at Sadar Ghat. A man in plain cloths took me there. I do not know if he was a police man. I was taken there from the house of Dr. Naimur Rahman, at about 10 A.M. Dr. Naimur Rahman told me the previous night that the next morning I would be taken to the Magistrate. A man presented me before the Magistrate to make my statement before him and then left. I cannot say if that man was a police man. I made my statement in Bengali.
I used to visit the Dacca Hotel only when I was asked to do so and not every day. Whenever I left Mr. Kamaluddin at the Dacca Hotel, he used to give instructions as to where and when I should meet him next. I had visited the room in which Kamaluddin was staying in the Dacca Hotel. I cannot remember the room number. I do not remember how many times I had gone to that room. It was a double-seater room. I do not remember if there was any office adjoining that room occupied by Mr. Kamaluddin. There was no light attached to the roof of the jeep.
I did not see Lt. Moazzem Hossain before the occasion that I brought him from the jeep. I had, however, seen Amir Hossain on previous occasions. Occasionally, Mr. Kamaluddin also used to live at the house of
Page: 146
Mr. K.G. Ahmed in Ram Krishna Mission Road, Dacca. I was not asked yesterday as to whether Kamaluddin ever stayed at the Dacca Hotel, therefore, I only mentioned that he resided in the house of K.G. Ahmed.
About four or five months earlier than I brought him from the Airport, I had known the name of Amir Hossain Mia.
TO COURT:
(The witness’s attention was drawn to his statement made yesterday in Court that he came to know Mr. Amir Hossain, later, after bringing him from the Airport and he was asked whether that statement was correct or his today’s statement that he knew him earlier, he says. – ‘I knew him earlier’ is really correct.)
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
I do not remember having statement before the Magistrate, that after leaving Lt. Moazzem Hossain in Dhanmondi, we left for the Dacca Hotel with the remaining three, that a bald headed man was in my jeep besides Std. Mujibur Rahman and Sultanuddin and that I heard his name as Amir Hossain (so recorded). Nor do I remember if I stated to the police that I came to know his name, later, as Amir Hossain (so recorded). The first day that I left these people at the Dacca Hotel was a Saturday. When I first brought them from the Airport to the Dacca Hotel it was about 2-30 to 3 A.M. It was, however, on a Sunday that I was asked by them at the Dacca Hotel to come and pick them up on the next day.
I had not been to Dr. Khaleque’s house before that occasion. However, I had heard Dr. Khaleque’s name earlier. I do not remember if I mentioned the name of Dr. Khaleque in my statement to the Magistrate or to the police (the name is not mentioned in either statement). I do not know where the dispensary or Dr. Khaleque is. I was never treated by him. Nor did I never take any patient to him. It is not correct that I heard the name of Dr. Khaleque from the police. When the jeep came to the house of Dr. Khalelque to pick up Lt. Moazzem Hossain next morning there was only hooting of the horn of the jeep and no one gets down from the jeep. I do not remember if I stated to the Magistrate that Sultanuddin got down from the jeep and
Page: 147
Lt. Moazzem Hossain came out of the house (so recorded). From Dr. Khaleque’s house, one has to go along to the New Market and from there up to the old Dacca Railway Station and then on to the Nawabpur Road and then one reaches the Dacca Hotel. I know Road No. 32 in Dhanmondi Residential Area, it is not necessary, in order to go from Dr. Khaleque’s house to the Dacca Hotel, that one should go along Road No. 32 in Dhanmondi Residential Area. I do not remember whether there was any rickshaw or auto rickshaw near the spot where we dropped Std. Mujibur Rahman with the direction to go to the house of Mr. Mujibur Rahman. It was about 9-30 A.M. or 15 minutes to 10 A.M. that we dropped Std. Mujibur Rahman, when we came to the Dacca Hotel, I was told to go away with the jeep and not wait there.
I, therefore, went back to Mr. K. G. Ahmed’s house. That day I was not again asked to come with the jeep. I do not remember to have taken the jeep to the Airport on any other occasion to receive any person arriving. I never brought Mr. K. G. Ahmed from the Airport in the jeep. I do not remember having brought Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed either from the Airport in the jeep. I do not remember having brought Sultanuddin Ahmed from the Airport in the jeep on any other occasion. It is not correct to suggest that the statement I have made with regard to bringing any passenger from the Airport in the jeep and then about taking Moazzem Hossain next day in the jeep from the house of Dr. Khaleque, as all false and was suggested to me by Mr. K. G. Ahmed and by Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed and by the Police.
TO COURT:
The house in which I am staying at present belongs to Seraj Member, for which I am paying rent to him. Again said -for the house in which I am staying, I am paying rent to Seraj Member’s house. (No other defence wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 148
CORRECTION
15.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.99, Nawab Ali, has been read over and explained to him Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of this Tribunal and he now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Member
Pagee: 149
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 100, MR. M.U. AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is M. U. Ahmed, son of late Mvi. Azharuddin Ahmed, aged 59 years, by faith a Muslim, now residing at 99, Peelkhana Road, China Building (Second floor), Dacca.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I was an A.D.P.I. in the East Pakistan Senior Education Service when I retired. Prior to that, I was a Professor of Philosophy, Principal of Dacca College and Member, East Pakistan Public Service Commission. I am in a house called ‘Psyche’. I have a prospective tenant that approached me. I utilised the old deed to make necessary changes and insert the name of the new tenant there in. The new proposed tenant was Mr. Mosharaf Ali Khan and his son, Mahboob Husain, but they actually never turned up to take possession of the house. The deed was signed by me and by Mr. Ashraf Ali Khan in my presence. This document was seized by the police and a seizure list was prepared, which I signed. I see my signature on the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.100/2. The deed is mentioned as item No. 1 in the list.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 100, MR. M.U. AHMED
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
MR. Ashraf Ali Khan had paid rent for the house for some months but he did not pay for the remaining months. I think I gave one rent receipt to the police. This was for June, 1966, for Rs. 175/- I had also realised Rs. 2,100/- from Mr. Ashraf Ali Khan in the month of May, 1966, this being the advance payment of half the year’s rent. I do not know whether under the law I am not entitled to take more than 2 months
Page: 150
rent in advance. The total period for which he occupied my house was 6 months and 17 days. Even after the payment made to me, still, 2 days’ rent is due from him after adjustment besides charges for electricity, water charges and conservancy charges. Mr. Ashraf Ali Khan left the house without giving me any notice. On 24th September, 1966. Mr. Ashraf Ali Khan gave me in writing that after taking the loan of Rs. 200/- he will pay me the rent for one year completely, all at a time. This would have included the conservancy charges etc. Quarterly bills are received for the water charges from WASA. The charges for the water are fixed at a flat rate without regard to the quantity of water consumed. The stamp paper for the deed was purchased by somebody else for me. Possibly it was my bearer who purchased the stamp papers. I cannot remember the date of the purchase.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
14.11.1968.
P.W. 100, Mr. M. U. Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 151
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 101, ABDUL LATIF ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal interpreted to him the oath in Bengali. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali).
My name is Abdul Latif son of Sultan Mia, aged 25 years by faith Muslim residing at 99/6, Azimpur, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination.
Cross-examination: Declined;
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 152
DEPOSITION OF P.W.102 RUSTAM MOLLAH ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal interpreted to him the oath in Bengali. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali.
My name is Rustam Mollah son of Zulmat Molla, aged 50 years by faith Muslim, residing at 127, Kakrail, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I know hotel Cassarina. The police seized some papers from that hotel in my presence in February, 1968. The police prepared a seizure list which I signed. This seizure list marked Ext. P.W.102/1. The police seized this bill book now marked Ext. P.W. 102/2, in my presence. Pages 89, and 110 of this book bear my signatures. These pages are now marked Exts, P.W. 102/3, and P.W. 102/4.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZUIMAT ALI KHAN
I am a bearer in that Cassarina hotel. The clerk of the hotel prepares the bills.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness). Read over and explained to the Witness in Bengali and admitted to be correct.
Chairmen.
Member
Page: 153
CORRECTION
15.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.102, Rustam Molla, has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of this Tribunal and he now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 154
DEPOSITION OF P. W. 103, ABDUL KARIM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal interpreted to him the oath in Bengali. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali).
My name is Abdul Karim son of Lalshah Doctor, aged 55 years faith Muslim residing at Cessarina Hotel where I serve a boy.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 155
DEPOSITION OF P.W.104, MD. HANIF ON SOLEMN
| AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Hanif, son of Mvi. Rahim Baksh Munshi, aged 31 years, by faith Muslim, residing at village Nayananda, P.S. Tongibari, District, Dacca.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a clerk, in the Motor Vehicle Department, Dacca Collectorate for the last 6 years. The police seized some paper from my office in my presence and prepared a seizure list. This is the seizure list marked Ext. P.W. 104/1, which bears my signature. This Registration Certificate now marked P. W:104/2, relating to car No. EBA-9591, now Dacca ‘kha’, was seized by the police by this seizure list. I have brought Motor Vehicle Register from my office. The corresponding entry of the certificate already marked P.W.104/2, appears in this register, which is now marked Ext. P.W.104/3. This entry bears my signature.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Page: 156
CORRECTION
14.11.1968.
P.W.104, Md. Hanif has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 157
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 103(105), SERAJUL ISLAM, ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Serajul Islam, son of Madat Elahi, aged 60 years by faith Muslim, residing at 20/1, Gopibagh 3rd Lane, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I reside at 20/1, Gopibagh 3rd Lane, Dacca. I know the premises at 20/3, Gopibagh 3rd Lane. This premise at 20/3 Gopibagh 3rd Lane is about 100 yards away from my residence and is situated in the opposite row. I have been staying in my residence at 20/1, for the last ten years. 20/3, Gopibagh 3rd Lane was taken on rent by Kamarunnahar Laili from me. Anwar Zahid was the name of her husband. Anwar Zahid was some time attached to ‘Ittefaq’. I do not know his other occupations.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
There are three lanes in Gopibagh. There is another lane on the east side of the 3rd lane which is not numbered. Recently that lane has been opened. Each of these lanes has got holdings with separate numbers. One has to give the correct number of the lane for the correct delivery of the mail. The lane will have to be mentioned for the correct delivery of mail of 20/3.
(No other defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Page: 158
TO MR. T.H. KHAN WITH PERMISSION OF THE COURT
Anwar Zahid and his wife had been living in that premises for about 7 years.
Cross-Examination: Declined.
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
15.11.1968.
P.W.105, Mr. Serajul Islam has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 159
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 106, MD SAFIUDDIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Safiuddin son of late Md. Sachaluddin aged 28 years by faith Muslim, residing at 33/1, Arambagh, Dacca.
P.W.106
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am working in the National Bank of Pakistan local office, Dacca, as sub-accountant since 11th May, 1968. Before coming to Dacca I was posted at Naogaon. I was posted in Madaripur Branch of this Bank from the 21st February to 2nd April, 1966, in all probability. While I was posted at Madaripur Police seized some papers from our Bank in my presence and prepared a seizure list. This is that seizure list now marked Ext. P.W. 10/1, which bears my signature. By the seizure list, the police seized the statement of account now marked Ext. P.W. 106/2, this payin-slip now marked Ext. P.W. 106/3, another pay-in-slip now marked at. Ext. P.W.106/4, this cheque now marked Ext. P.W.106/5, another cheque now marked Ext. P.W. 106/6 and also another cheque marked Ext. P.W.106/7, Ext. 106/2 is the certified copy of the ledger of account of one Mujibur Rahman and has been certified by the Bank as a correct copy. Exts P.W.106/3 and P.W. 106/4 are the Banker’s parts of the payin-slips. In Exts. P.W. 106/5, P.W. 108/6 and P.W. 106/7 the signatures of the drawers are on the reverse.
Page: 160
P.W.106. CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
This copy of the ledger was prepared on 26.2.68. Police went for seizing this document at about 1 P.M. The Police stayed in our Bank for about an hour, They also took away the ledger book. I do not find the ledger book in Court today. Again says-the ledger book itself was not taken by the police. It is still with the Bank. Item No. 2 in the seizure List reads: “ledger No 2 of Savings Bank account with National Bank of Pakistan, Madaripur”. The cheques I have exhibited are all bearer cheques. I cannot say whether the signature on the reverse of the cheques are those of the drawee mentioned in the cheque. These are all self cheques. The drawer has also signed on the back of these cheques. Anybody can deposit money in an account giving the account number at signing the pay in slip.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness further.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
15.11.1968.
P.W.106, Mr. Md. Shafiuddin has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 161
DEPOSITION OF P.W.107, DR.S.M. ANWARUL ISLAM
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is S. M. Anwarul Islam, son of S. M. Syedul Islam, aged about 36 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at 37, Jamal Khan Lane, Chittagong
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 162
DIPOSITION OF P.W.108, MR. ABUL KASHEM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Abul Kashem, son of late Abul Hashem, aged 35 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at Mahakhali C&B Quarter, Dacca.
I am serving as Head Clerk under the Executive Engineer, Road Division 111 of the Roads & Highways Directorate since 1962. This Memo was issued by the Executive Engineer, Dacca Construction Rod Division No. 111 and is signed by him. I know his signature (The Memo is marked Ext. P.W.108/1). We received this letter from the Superintending Engineer, Dacca Rood Circle who in his turn received it from the assistant Chief Engineer, Roads & Highways Division regarding the opening of Demra-Daudkandi Road and Levy of Tolls on Traffic. This Memo purports to instruct that the road in question is opened to traffic and certain tolls are to be realised from the public using the roads and crossing the ferries. This letter here gives the rate approved by the Government. It was issued from the R.W. & R.T. (R & H) Department prescribing the amount of tolls to be realised. This letter was enclosed with Ext. P.W. 198/1. (This letter is now separately marked as Ext. P.W.108/2.) These were received in our office in the official course of business. The instructions contained in those letters are being implemented. Every Ferry has a register number.
Page: 163
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
Ext. P.W. 108/1 issues instructions to the S.D.O. by the Executive Engineer for the maintenance of appropriate registers.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine this witness further.)
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 164
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 109, MD. HAFIZUDDIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence in Bengali).
My name is Md. Hafizuddin, son of Taharuddin, aged 40 years, by faith a Muslim, residing at 42. Ram Chandra Das Lane, Khulna town.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN I reside in Khulna town in Dolkhola. I know the Taj Mahal Hotel in Khulna. Police seized some papers from that hotel in my presence and prepared a seizure list. The seizure list is marked as Ext. P.W.109/1, which bears my signature. This register, now marked as Ext. P.W.109/2, was seized by the Police and my signature appears on this register.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 166
CORRECTION
15.11.68.
The statement of P. W. 109, Md. Hifizuddin has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of this Tribunal and the witness now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 167
DEPOSITION OF P.W.110, AMANULLAH ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal will interpret the oath as well as the evidence in Bengali).
My name is Amanullah, son of Shawkatullah, aged 28 years, by faith a Muslim, residing at Daudkandi Road and Highways Ghat, District Comilla.
Tender for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: DECLINED.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 168
DEPOSITION OF P.W.111, MD. SIDDIQUR RAHMAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Siddiqur Rahman, son of Abdul Quddus, aged 27 years, by faith Muslim of village Katchpur, P.S. Bayedder Bazzar, Dist. Dacca.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a Sub-Assistant Engineer under the C&B Department and posted at Katchpur. The bank of Katchpur is known as Simaril, there is a ferry and also a mar boat which is used for taking the cars across the ferry. This Ferry Ghat is managed by the Government Department namely, Roads & Highways Directorate. There is a lock-gate at the ferry. One has to take a toll ticket or a pass or a token for getting the car across. There are three parts of the Toll Book. Out of these three parts, two parts are issued to the car owner to take the car across the ferry. The third part is retained in the Toll office by which the ticket is issued. Out of these two parts that are given to the car owner one of these retained by the car owner and the other is surrendered at the last exit, i.e. at the last exit of the last ferry on this highway. The highway from Dacca goes up to Comilla and then on Chittagong.
If a person starts from Dacca for Chittagong then the last part of this ticket will be surrendered at Daudkandi. If a man incoming from Chittagong to Dacca he will have to purchase a ticket at Daudkandi and will have to surrender the last part at Katchpur, that is the west bank of
Page: 169
Lakha or in other wards at Simaril. On the Dacca-Chittagong Road, there are three crossings over the rivers. All these three crossings are under Govt. Control. Police seized three log books from our office by preparing a seizure list in my presence. This is the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.111/1 and it bears my signature. These are the three log books which were seized from our office. These log books are now marked as Ext. P.W.111/2, P.W.111/3 and P.W.111/4.
Page: 170
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
15 11.1968.
Present
Mr. Justice SIA. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman.
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum- ul-Hakim, Member.
For the prosecution …….. As before.
For the defence …………. As before.
Accused present …………. As before.
Witness of oath …………. As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.111, MD. SIDDIQUR RAHMAN CONTINUED CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
If one starts for Chittagong by the road he has to come to the Sitalakhya river first. The second river to be crossed is Meghna and the third would be Gumati-cum-Meghna. The names of the banks of river Gumati-cum-Meghna are, on the Dacca side, Baushia, and on the Chittagong side, Daudkhandi.
The register shown to me is maintained in the Katchpur R & H Office. (This register is marked Ext. P.W.111/4). I come from the Office in which the register is maintained. I see the entry in this register which is now marked as Ext. P.W.111/5. This entry was made by the ferry-men at Daudkhandi on the Gumati-cum-Meghna river.
Page: 171
This entry shows that car No EBA 8185 crossed from Daudkhandi to Baushia and also under the same entry the second car No. EBA 9591, crossed over in the same direction. This entry was made on the 8th of August, 1966. All cars crossing the river would be entered in the registers in due course of official business. In the register, show to me Ext. P.W.111/2, I see the entry now marked as P.W.111/6. This register relates to the Sitalakhya ghat and the entry shows that car EBA 9195, crossed the Sitalakhya river from Dacca side to Chittagong side, on the 8th May, 1967. This entry must have been made by the Khalassi at Sitalakhya. The Mar-boat No. 6 was used for this transport as the register shows. I further see the entry in this register now marked as Ext. P.W.111/7. This shows that Car No. EBC 7976 crossed from Dacca side to Chittagong side on the Sitalakhya river, on 8″, May, 1967. In the register Ext.P.W.111/3, I see the entry now, marked as Ext. P.W.111/8, which shows that car No. EBC 7976 crossed from Dacca side to the Chittaging side of the Sitalakhya River on 14″ January, 1967. This entry was made by the ferry-man there. This register relates to Mar-boat No. 6. All the registers now shown to me marked as Ext. P.W. 111/9, P. W. 111/10, P.W. 111/11, P.W.111/12, P.W.11/13, P.W. 111/14, P.W.11/15 and P.W. 11/16 appertain to our office. I see in the register Ext. P.W. 111/9, the entry now marked as Ext. P.W.11/17. This shows that car No. EBC 9100 crossed from Chittagong side towards Dacca side on the river Sitalakhya on 4th June, 1967. This entry must have been made by the ferry-man and it relates to Ferry No. 1. In the register Ext. P.W. 11/10, I see the entry now marked as Ext. P.W.11/18, which shows that car No. EBC 9100 crossed from Comilla side to Dacca side, on the Sitalakhya River on 8″ May, 1967. This also relates to Ferry-men there. In the same register I see the entry now marked as Ext. P.W. 111/19 which shows that car No. EBC 9100 crossed from Comilla side to Dacca side on 7th May, 1967 on the Sitalakhya River at Ferry No. 1. In the register P.W. 11/11, I see the entry now marked as Ext. P.W. 111/20, which shows that car No EBC 9100, crossed from Comilla side to Dacca side, on 29″ June, 1967 on the Sitalakhya River by the Mar-boat No. 6. In the register Ext.
Page: 172
P.W.111/12, I see the entry now marked as Ext. P.W.111/21, which shows that car No. EBC 9100 crossed from Dacca Side to Comilla side on the Sitalakhya River on 17th July, 1967. This relates to Ferry’s ‘SherE-Bangla’. In the register Ext. P.W.111/13, I see the entry now marked as Ext. P.W.111/22, which shows that car No. EBC 7976 crossed from Comilla side to Dacca side on the Meghna-cum-Gumati River on 8th May, 1967. In the same register I see the entry now marked as Ext P.W. 111/23 which shows that car No. EBC 9100 crossed from Dacca side to Chittagong side, on 9th May, 1967 on the Maghna-cum-Gumati River. This relates to ferry ‘Milon’. In the Register Ext. P.W.111/14, I see the entry now marked as Ext P.W.111/24, which shows that car No. EBC 9100 crossed from Dacca side to Comilla side, on the 17th July, 1967, on the Meghna-cum-Gumati River. This entry was entered by the ferry-man of Ferry ‘Panipat’. In the same register I also see the entry now marked as Ext. P.W.111/25, which shows that car No. EBC 9100, crossed from Dacca side to Comilla side, on the 13th July, 1967 on the same river and ferry. The ferry-man must have made the same entry also. In the register Ext. P.W.111/15, I see the entry now marked as Ext. P.W. 111/26 which shows that car No. EBC 7976 crossed from Chittagong side to Dacca side, on the river Meghnacum-Gumati on the 10th of March, 1967. The entry was written by the ferry-man of the ferry ‘Parapar’.
In the register P.W. 111/16 I see the entry now marked Ext. P.W. 111/27 which shows that car number E.B.C. 3455 crossed from the Comilla side to Dacca side, on the 4th June, 67, on the river MeghnaGumati through ferry ‘Parapar’. I also see another entry in the register which is marked Ext. P.W. 111/28 which shows that car No. EBC 9100 crossed from Chittagong side to Dacca side on the 4″ June, 67, on the same river and ferry.
One could go by an alternative route by road from Dacca towards Chittagong, crossing the ferry at I.W.T.A. ferry from Narayanganj to Daudkhandi. If one crosses by the ferries as I have mentioned, the entry must be made in the relevant register.
Page: 173
TO COURT
I do not know if the IWTA ferry would record the numbers of the cars crossing or not. After the registers are finished by the ferry-man, they are deposited in the office of the sub divisional Engineer’s office and I am working in that office.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I joined this Office on the 6th April, 1966 at R&H Office, Katchpur. That place is on the south side of Demra and the river is known as Sitalakhya. That is the first crossing from Dacca to Chittagong. The second crossing is on the Meghna River but I do not know the names of the two banks of the ferry. I have crossed that ferry but as we take T.A. by the mileage. I do not remember the names of the places. Our Sub divisional office controls the three ferries from Dacca to Chittagong. Opposite to Daudkhandi is Baushia. At the ferries, I might have stayed two or three hours at a time. I have not personally made any of the entries in the registers which I have proved. I cannot identify the hand writing of these entries as of any particular person. The ferry-man makes the entries in these registers. From time to time ferry-men may change, at one ghat. In each ferry, there are 6 ‘Khalasies’ or ferry-men. If a car crosses both ways while coming and going at the ferry, both entries would normally be recorded in the register. IWTA ferry is a big ferry that which carries cars and passengers both. The crossing by the IWTA ferry would take a longer time than if one goes from Dacca to Comilla via Katchpur. At the relevant time fee for the crossing of the car by all the three ferries via Katchpur was only three rupees. I do not know if charges for the use of the IWTA ferry was Rs. 25/- per car plus Rs. 5/- for each passenger. I do not know the distance between our ferry ghat at Daudkandi and the IWTA ferry ghat. Again said, I misunderstood the question – the distance between the two ghats would be about 200 feet. I do not know if the IWTA also keeps records of the crossing of cars or not. In the entries in these registers the time taken to cross the river from
Page: 174
one ghat to the opposite side is not mentioned. The name of the car owner or driver is not mentioned in the registers.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Admitted to be correct.
Member
Member.
CORRECTION
18.11.1968.
P.W.1117, Md. Siddiqur Rahman has read over his statement to himself and now he states follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 175
DEPOSITION OF P.W.112, ABDUL MANNAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Abdul Mannan, son of late Mvi. Kader Baksh Sarkar, aged 30 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at Block No. E, Plot No. 18, Banani Model Town Dacca-12.
I was sub divisional Engineer in the office of Bhitikandi sub-division of Construction Division No. 3 from November, 1967 to the 15th May, 1968.
In March, 1968 the Police seized some log books in my presence from our Sub-divisional office at Katchpur. A seizure list was prepared by the police which I signed. I see my signature on the seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.111/1. The log books Ext. P.W.111/2, 111/13 and 111/4 were the log books seized at that time.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I have never travelled by IWTA.
IWTA Ferry Narayanganj neither in my official capacity nor in my non-official capacity. IWTA Ferry touches at Daudkhandi on the other side. I do not know if the IWTA Ferry people keep records of cars crossing there on or not.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 176
DEPOSITION OF P.W.113, TAFIZUDDIN MIA ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(The witness does not know English. The oath was interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register who will also interpret his evidence).
My name is Tafizuddin Mia, son of Mafizuddin Mia, aged 55 years, by faith Muslim, of the village and P.S. Shibalaya, District Dacca.
I am a resident of village Shibalaya. I know the office of the Terminal Superintendent of the East Pakistan Shipping Corporation at Aricha ghat. P.S. Shibalaya. That is near my village. In my presence police seized some documents from that office March, 1968. I signed the seizure list that was prepared on that occasion by the police. I see my signature on the list now marked Ext. P.W.113/1. The police seized nine books in my presence. I signed on each one of them. I see my signature on one page of one of these books here. (The page is marked Ext. P.W.113/2). My signature also appeared on the page now marked Ext. P.W.113/3 in the second book and at the page now marked Ext. P.W. 113/4, in the third book, I also see my signature on the page marked Ext. P.W.113/5 of the next book and at the page marked Ext. P.W.113/6 of another book. My signature also appears on the page now marked Ext. P.W.113/7 of another book here. I also see my signature of the page marked Ext. 113/8 of another book. My signature also appears on the page marked Ext. P.W.113/9, in another book. I also see my signature on the page marked Ext. P.W.113/10 in another book here.
Page: 177
CROSS-EXAMINATION (None of the defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
CORRECTION
18.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.113, Tafizuddin Mia has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal and now he states as Follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 178
DEPOSITION OF P.W.114, TASIRUDDIN AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar who will also interpret the evidence).
My name is Tasiruddin Ahmed, son of late Mafizuddin Ahmed, aged 60 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing in village Nihalpur, P.S. Shibalaya, District Dacca.
I am a resident of Nihalpur, P.S. Shibalaya. I know the office of the Terminal Superintendent of the East Pakistan Shipping Corporation at Arihca Ghat. In March, 1968 the police seized some documents from that office in my presence and prepared a seizure list. The seizure list now marked Ext.P.W.114/1 bears my signature. The books that were seized by the Police were also signed by me. I see my signatures on the pages marked Ext. P.W.114/2 to 114/10.
CROSS-EXAMINATION Declined Read over to the witness in Bengali and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 179
CORRECTION
18.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.114, Mr. Tasiruddin Mia has been interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and he now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 180
DEPOSITION OF P.W.115, MD. SOLAIMAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali).
My name is Md. Solaiman, son of Noor Mohammad aged 36 years by faith Muslim, residing at Hotel Shahajahan in Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am the Manager of Hotel Shahajahan, Chittagong since 1962. I am still serving there as such. On 5th February, 1968 the police seized some papers from my hotel after preparing a seizure list in my presence. This is the seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.115/1 which bears my signature. The bill book now marked Ext. P.W.115/2 was seized by the police by that seizure list from our hotel. This is the hotel copy of the bill prepared in the name of Mr. Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, now marked Ext. P.W.115/3. The bill is dated 25.3.1966. This is written in the hand of our receptionist whose hand writing I know.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.115, MD. SOLAIMAN TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I saw Sheikh Mujibur Rahman only once. Many people used to go and visit him at the hotel. At that time the rent of the double seated room of our hotel was Rs. 35/- per day and that of a single seated room was Rs. 20/- per day. I cannot say what the seat rent in hotel MISKA was.
(No other counsel wishes cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 181
DEPOSITION OF P.W.116. SOMESHER NAHA ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Somesher Naha, son of Iswar Chandra Naha, aged 28 years, by faith a Hindu staying at hotel Shahjahan in Chittagong where I am a receptionist.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN Tendered for cross-examination
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 182
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 117, ABDUL MALEK ON
SOLEMN: AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Abdul Malek, son of late Abdul Hakim, aged 42 years, by faith a Muslim residing at 37, Sadarghat, Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a business man. I am a general merchant. I mainly deal in motorcycles and its parts and also rice haulers and flour crushing mills and their accessories. Police made a search in my shop and seized this carbon copy of the cash Memo. After preparing a seizure list which is now marked as Ext. P.W.11771 and bears my signature. This cash Memo book now marked an Ext. P.W.117/2 was seized by that seizure list. I see these pages at Sl. No. 774 now marked as Ext. P.W.117/3. This bears my signature. I wrote this cash memo. Ext. P.W.117/3, this is the carbon copy of the cash memo. This cash memo was prepared in the name of Shamsul Huq for a motor-cycle purchased from my shop described as DUKATY motor-cycle 48-C.C.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUL MALEK
This cash memo is dated 14.4.67. I sold a motor-cycle on that date and I received the price on that day.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 183
DEPOSITION OF P.W.118, MOKHTAR AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Mokhtar Ahmed, son of Abdul Khalieque, age 25 years, by faith a Muslim, residing at Firoz-Shah Colony, Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am an Accounts Assistant in the Motor Corporation, Chittagong. The police seized some papers from our office in my presence by preparing a seizure list. The seizure list already marked as Ext. P.W. 38/2 was the one that was prepared in my presence and it also bears my signature. A provisional receipt already marked as Ext. P.W. 6/8 and another receipt already marked as Ext. P.W. 6/9 were seized by that seizure list.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 184
DEPOSITION OF P.W.119, MD. ALTAF HUSAIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Altaf Hussain, son of Sahed Ali Howledar, aged 28 years, by faith a Muslim, now attached to the Feni Police Station as an S.I. of Police, District Noakhali.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN.
I am attached to Feni P.S. since July, 1967. On 3.2.68 I seized hotel register of hotel ‘Denofa’ after preparing a seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.119/1, in the presence of the witnesses who also signed the seizure list. I see the hotel register already marked as Ext. P.W.59/1 which was signed by this seizure list of 3.2.68. I also seized a trunk-call receipt book from Feni Telegraph office on 7.2.68, by preparing a seizure list in the presence of witnesses who also signed the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.119/2. This is the Trunk-Call receipt book which I seized now marked as Ext. P.W.119/3.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I was not Officer-in-Charge of the Feni Police Station at that time or even now. I made that seizure on getting requisition from Mr. A.K.M. Ahsanullah, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Special Branch, Dacca. In both cases, I received the requisition from the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Mr. Ahsanullah. I have got a requisition with me. This requisition now marked Ext. D. 0. /1 was addressed to the Sub-Divisional Police Officer, Feni and it was endorsed to me by the Sub-divisional Police officer for taking necessary action. The note at the bottom of Ext. D.O./1 is by the S.B. Office and I cannot read it properly. This requisition was endorsed in my name on 28.2.68. I submitted my report on 2.3.68. I only
Page: 185
seized the document and did not hold any investigation this matter. I went to the Denofa hotel and seized the register there and it is not correct to say that the register was brought to the Thana and then I seized it. When I seized this registrar of the Denofa hotel it was in this from as it is now. Before the seizure of this register of denofa hotel. I did not meet anybody who was connected with the investigation of this case at Feni.
I also went to the C & B Dak Bungalow. I seized the Dak Bungalow Register and left it in the Zimmaof Abdul Wahab, Chowkidar of that Dak Bungalow. I know one Ruhul Amin who was Manager of hotel Appayan. I know that hotel which is in Feni town. Ruhul Amin and | Abdul Wahab were not brought to the Thana in my presence. I do not know whether any requisition or summons was sent to my thana from Dacca for sending Ruhul Amin and Abdul Wahab to Dacca.
(On being pointed out by the Court that the Seizure List is dated 3.2.68 where as the requisition for seizing the hotel register is dated 27.2.68 and on being asked how could it be possible that the witness seized the hotel register in pursuance of this requisition which is already marked Ext. D.0/1, the witness now states). I actually seized the hotel register in pursuance of a search warrant which was indorsed to me and the requisition in question is a subsequent requisition.
(At this stage, Mr. T.H. Khan produced a search warrant which was shown to the witness. The witness after seeing the document states). This is the search warrant in pursuance of which I seized the hotel register. (The search warrant is now marked Ext. P.W.119/4.) It bears my report on the back.
I was looking for the names of Sultanuddin Ahmed, Daluluddin Ahmed, A.B.M. Abdus Samad and Mr. Ali Reza in the hotel register. I did not find any such name in the register. I also met the Manager of the hotel Denofa in this connection. I make no other enquiry in this connection from the Manager. I did not meet any investigator from the Special Branch in connection with this case on 7.2.68 when I seized the trunk- call register. I took half an hour to seize this trunk-call register.
Page: 186
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
18.11.1968.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr.Justice S. A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
(Mr. Justice M. R. Khan has gone to Lahore to take oath as a Judge of the Supreme Court).
For the prosecution: As before.
For the defence: As before.
Accused present: As before.
Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.119 CONTINUES
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
On 7.2.1968 I had seized the Trunk call receipt book. I did not meet any Special Branch Officer on that day at Feni. For the seizure of the trunk call register, there was not search warrant. This was seized on a requisition from the D.S.P., Special Branch. I had received this requisition from the D.S.P. on 7.2.1968 with the endorsement of the 0. C. Feni, at 8 a.m. I had seized the trunk call register at about 5 p.m. that day. The requisition was handed over to me by the O.C. Feni. I did not know how the requisition had come to the Thana. I do not know at all whether Mr. Ahsanuallah, D.S.P. Special Branch, was at Feni on that day
Page: 187
and actually examining witness in connection with this case. The DakBungalow register from Feni was seized on 3.2.1968 and I left in it the zimma of the chowkidar. That was seized on the strength of a search warrant. I have got the search warrant with me. The Magistrate apparently signed this warrant on 2.2.1968 and on the same date the O.C. Feni endorsed it to me for execution. I am not aware that the Chowkidar of that Dak-Bungalow was examined by Mr. Ahsanullah, D.S.P., and S.B. on the 7th of February, 1968. On receipt of a search warrant at the Police Station, it is entered in the register. The sherista A.S.I. enters it.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
CORRECTION
18.11.1968.
P.W. 119, Mr. Altaf Hossain has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 188
DEPOSITION OF P.W.120, TAJUL ISLAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant registrar of the Tribunal interpreted the oath in Bengal. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali).
My name is Tajul Islam, son of Mvi. Afsaruddin, by faith Muslim, aged 22 years of village Anandpur, P.S.Burichong district Comilla.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a Telegraphist at Feni Telegraph Office. The Police seized a register in my presence. This register marked Ext. P.W. 119/3 was seized by the police from our office under the seizure list Ext. P.W. 119/2 on the 7th February, 1968. I signed the seizure list and I see my signature on it here.
CROSS -EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KAHN
I see the trunk call receipt show to me, marked Ext. DP/1. This is dated 11.7.1967. The time of this trunk call was 5.15 P.M. as the entry shows. This is the time at which the connection was made. The booking time is not mentioned in this receipt.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
(With permission of the Court: To Mr. T. H. Khan) The register in which the receipt is included is maintained in the official course of business in our office. The receipt which I have proved is in my hand
Page: 189
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Read over to him and submitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
CORRECTION
18.11.1968.
P.W.120, Tajul Islam has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 190
DEPOSITION OF P.W.121, MR. A. K. M. SAHABUDDIN
My name is A. K. M. Sahabuddin, son of Al-Hajj Fazlul Karim, aged
Noakhali.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined:
Chairman.
Member
Page: 192
DEPOSITION OF P.W.122, MD. NOOR AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not Know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal interpreted the oath in Bengali. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali).
My name is Md. Noor Ahmed, son of Badsha Mia, by faith Muslim, aged 23 years, of village Char Hakdi, P.S. Feni, district Noakhali.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I know hotel Denofa in Feni. I am a clerk in that hotel. The police seized in my presence from that hotel the register marked Ext. P.W. 59/1. A seizure list was prepared in my presence which I signed. I see my signature here on the seizure list marked Ext. 119/1.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: DECLINED
Read over to him and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 194
CORRECTION
18.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.122, Md. Noor Ahmed has been interpreted to
and he stated that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Page: 195
DEPOSITION OF P.W.123, NAZIR AHMED ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Nazir Ahmed, son of Ebadullah, aged 22 years, by faith
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I know hotel Denofa in Feni. The Police seized in my presence the hotel register from the hotel Denofa which I now see here marked as Ext. P.W. 59/1. A seizure list was prepared which I signed and I see my signature on Ext. P.W.119/1.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 196
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 124, RUHUL AMIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahiman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Ruhul Amin, son of Ali Ahmed Mia, aged 50 years, by
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a lift-man at Hotel Miska in Chittagong. I have been there for the last 6 years. I attended the T.I. parade in Dacca on two consecutive days. I
in all as among those I had seen at Hotel Miska in Chittagong. There were about 50 persons at the T.I. parade when I identified these persons. The parade was supervised by a Magistrate. I had seen those persons in hotel Miska in 1966 but I cannot remember the month. Out of the three persons whom I recognized on the first day in the parade, I can only point out one of them in the dock. (The witness pointed out Mr. Manik Chowdhury the accused in the dock and when the witness was asked whether he could pick out in the dock the person who identified on the second day, the witness, after looking a while at accused in the dock, said, I cannot point him out.) None of the three persons I had identified on the first day had a beard. The 4ch man whom I identified on the second day was also without beard. (Std. Mujibur Rahman and Sultanuddin accused were asked by the Court to stand up in the dock on the request of the learned prosecution counsel. Std.
Page: 197
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I belong to Chittagong. I have been living in that town for the last 6 years. There is a City Awami League Office opposite hotel Miska in the rest house at Chittagong. I am not aware if Manik Chowdhury is a businessman in Chittagong. I do not know if Manik Chowdhury was the treasurer of the Awami League of Chittagong. Many people had held parties at hotel Miska in Chittagong. But I cannot say who arranged for the parties. The Muslim League and Awami League also held their functions in that hotel. I know Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury, the labour
Awami League also. Zahur Ahmed Chowdhury also had a party in the hotel Miska. I have seen the accused, I have identified in the hotel several times. I do not know his name. The rent of a single-seated room was Rs. 10/- and that of a double seated room was Rs. 15/- and Rs. 17/per day in that hotel and for our Air-conditioned room, however Rs. 20/per day for a single setter and Rs.25/- for a double setter was charged. The Air-conditioners are now out of order. Room No. 4 in the hotel was Air-conditioned when the Air-conditioner was functioning.
About 6 months back I made a statement to the Police. I attended the T.I. parade at Dacca about one or two months after I made my statement to the Police. I cannot remember if I made the statement to the Police on the 10h May, 1968 nor do I remember the month. I had received a notice calling me to the T.I. parade. I was not received by anyone at Dacca station when I arrived here. The persons included in the parade had different dresses on some were in a Lungi, some in Paijama and some in trousers. I cannot remember if some of them had beards and some were without
remember whether there was at all any bald-headed man in the parade.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairmen.
Member
Page: 198
CORRECTION
18.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.124, Ruhul Amin has been read over and
Tribunal and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Page: 199
DEPOSITION OF P.W.125, MR. Z. H. CHAUDHURI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Z. H. Chaudhuri, Son of Mr. Md. Hasan Cheema, aged 47 years, Chief Statistical Officer, Central Statistical Office, Regional, Lahore.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
From 18th December, 1967 to 21st October, 1968 I was the Chief Statistical Officer, Central Regional Statistical Office, Dacca.
The police seized in my presence from our office at Dacca. The attendance register marked Ext. P.W.3/76. A seizure List was prepared which I signed. I see here the seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.125/1. This attendance register was maintained in our office in the usual official course of business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
The members of the staff but not the officers give their initials in these registers when they come to the office. The Officer-in-charge also initials at the bottom of the page every day.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 201
CORRECTION
P.W.125, Mr. Z.H.Chaudhuri has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 202
DEPOSITION OF P.W.126, DAULAT KHAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar who will also interpret his evidence).
My name is Daulat Khan, s/o Saman Khan, aged 20 years, by faith Muslim. I reside at village Holara, P.S.-Singair, Dist. Dacca.
I am an electrician. I work privately and of the work wherever I am called upon. The police seized some paper from Nawab Ali Driver in my presence. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see my signature on the seizure list marked Ext. P.W.85/1. The paper that was seized on that occasion, I see here, marked Ext. P.W.85/2, which was signed by me on the back.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
At the time of the seizure of these documents, I was residing in a shop by the side of a mosque opposite the Babupura Police outpost. I knew Nawab Ali from before as he is my co-villager. Nawab Ali was
that I reached the outpost when the seizure was made. There was another man presented there but I did not know his name. That man was already there when I arrived. Nawab Ali was already at the
months earlier from that day.
Page: 203
TO MR. ABDULLAH
I have never attended any other search by the police. Nor I attend the outpost in Babupura from time to time.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman. Member
CORRECTION
19.11.1968.
The deposition of P.W.126 Mr. Daulat Khan has been read over end explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, and now he states that it has been correctly recorded.
Member.
Page: 204
DEPOSITION OF P.W.127, MD. ABUL BASHAR ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md Abul Bashar, s/o. Md. Belayet Hussain, aged 45 years, by faith Muslim; I reside at Thanapur, Kushtia.
Mr. Anwaruddin Khan is a Manager of the I.D.B.P, Motijheel, Dacca. He is my son-in-low. He resides at 92, Dhanmandi R.A. Road No. 2. I know Road No. 18 in Dhanmandi area. In the house resided in by Ali Reza, the Police seized some documents in my presence. I singed a seizure list that was prepared on that occasion. I see my signature on the list marked Ext. P.W.27/1. I cannot say whether Ext. P.W.27/2 was one of the documents seized on that occasion. There was however a diary
cannot say which those papers were. All those documents were entered in the seizure list in my presence. I cannot say what the contents of those documents were
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I was residing in 22/C, Road No.18, Dhanmandi West, at the time of seizure. Ali Reza’s house was about 200 feet from the place where I used
about 4 or 5 A.M. I did not consult the watch. There were 16 or 17 persons present there when I arrived at the house. Of them, 8/10 persons may have been in uniform and the rest of them were in plain clothes. When I reached there the search was going on. I sat beside Mr. Ali Reza in the drawing room during the search. I did not enter any other room in the house. They may be 3/4 rooms in it. I do not know whether any other
Page: 205
Reza on the day of the seizure, alone. I cannot say if Squadron Leader Rahman was present during the search. I cannot say which paper was recovered from which room in the house. Some 5/6 persons were sitting in the drawing room including one mason. No person in police clothes. I did not hear Mr. Ali Reza asking that man his name. Nor did I hear him giving his name as Squadron Leader Rahman. All the entries were made in my presence. I was not asked to check up all the entries made on this seizure list with the documents there. Nor was I asked to compare each document with the description in the seizure list. Nor did I make any comparison myself.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman Member
CORRECTION
P.W.127, Mr. Abul Bashar has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
On page 915 in the first line, instead of ‘is’ the word should be ‘was ‘. The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 206
DEPOSITION OF P.W.128, MR. MOKABBAR ALI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
aged 40 years attached to Double Mooring Police Station, Chittagong as S.I.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I have been attached to Police Station, Double Moorings, Chittagong from March, 1967. I went with the search warrant endorsed
Bank, Agrabad, Chittagong. From there I took possession of certain documents as per as seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.128/1 in the presence of witnesses. The search warrant on which I acted is now marked Ext. P.W.128/2. The cheque Ext. P.W.676 and the ledger now marked Ext. P.W.128/3 were among the documents seized by me on that
CROSS- EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
Item No. 2 in the seizure list is a cheque for Rs 1,000/- paid to Chittagong Club by Mr. M. M. Rameez. Item No. 3 is another cheque for Rs. 6,000/- paid to PIAC by Mr. Rameez. Item No. is a cheque for Rs. 674/- paid to Chittagong Club by Mr. Rameez. Item No. 5 is another cheque for Rs. 268/50 paisa”, paid to the E.B.R.C. by Rameez. Item No. 6 is a cheque for Rs. 1,000/- paid to the Chittagong club by Mr. Rameez. Item No. 10 is a cheque for Rs. 3445/- paid to PIA by Mr. Rameez. The date of this cheque is 29.6.67. The cheque mentioned at item No. 3 is dated 14.10.67.
Page: 207
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
CORRECTION
19.11.68.
P.W.128 Mr. Mokabbar Ali has read over his statement himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 208
DEPOSITION OF P.W.129, MR. S. M. A. TAHER ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is S.M.A. Taher, son of Sayed Nurul Amin, aged 41 years, by faith Muslim, now Manager, Eastern Marcantile Bank, Agrabad branch, Chittagong.
I am Manager of the Eastern Mercantile Bank Agrabd Branch, Chittagong. On 24.2.68 the Police came to my branch and seized certain documents from my Bank and prepared a seizure list in my presence which I signed. I see my signature on Ext. P.W.128/1. The ledger Ext. P.W. 128/3 and the cheque Ext. P.W.676 were among the documents seized from the Bank on that occasion. I find there is an entry in the ledger corresponding to this cheque. (The entry is now marked Ext. P.W.129/1.) This ledger has been maintained in our bank in the regular course of the banking business.
CROSS-EXAMTNATION
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
Ext. P.W.676 is a crossed cheque. On the reverse of the cheque, I do not see any signature of the drawee or the payee. The account in which this cheque has been entered was over-drawn as I see from the ledger. It was an account of Mr. Rameez. I find that the account has been overdrawn to the extent of Rs.2608/29 Paisas. The account was opened on the
Mr. Mujibur Rahman for the amount of Rs. 1,000/- was stopped from payment being made on instruction from Mr. Rameez. The date of the stoppage is not mentioned.
Page: 210
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
CORRECTION
19.11.68.
P.W.129, Mr. S. M. A. Taher has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
My father’s name should be recorded as “Ruhul Amin’ and not ‘Nurul Amin’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: Page: 211
DEPOSITION OF P.W.130, AZHARUL HUQ ON SOLEMN
My name is Azharul Huq, son of Mvi. Ahmed Chowdhury aged 34 years, by faith a Muslim, Village-Dhewa, P.S. Raozan, Dist. Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN Tendered for cross-examination.
Cross-Examination: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 212
DEPOSITION OF P.W.131, MD. SHAFIQUR RAHMAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Shafiqur Rahman, son of Mvi. Kader Box, aged 29 years of village Baritali, P.S. Banshkhali, Dist., Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a clerk in the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Chittagong in the Motor Vehicles Department. I have been there from 1964 on 17.4.68 the Police seized certain documents from our office and prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see here my signature on the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.131/1. The two registers shown to me now marked as Ext. P.W.131/2 and P.W.131/3 were also seized on that
the page now marked as Ext. P.W.131/4 which relates to Mr. M. Husain, son of Mr. Mofazzel Ali of 289, Enayat Bazar Chittagong, with regard to Moskovitch car No, EBC 7976. In the register Ext. P.W. 131/2, I see entries on the page now marked as Ext. P.W.131/5. The entries on this page relate to Mr. A.K.M. Shamsul Huq in respect of Motor-Cycle No. EBC 8529 and the motor-cycle is described as DUCATI. The blue-book is shown to me and now marked as Ext. P.W.131/6 contains entries which correspond to those at the page marked as Ext. P.W.131/5 in the register. The blue-book is the registration book issued by our office in the name of Mr. A. K. M. Shamsul Huq.
Page: 213
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
The register Ext. P.W.131/2 extends from 1966 to 1967. The register contains no index and unless I scrutinize all the entries in the register I
name of Manik Choudhury or Bhupati Bhushan Chowdhury.
TO MR. ABDUL MALEK
The motor-cycle was registered in the name of A. K. M. Shamsul Huq on 4.5.67. The entries show that the motor-cycle had been purchased on the 14″ April, 1967.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
CORRECTION
19.11.1968.
P.W.131, Mr. Md. Shafiqur Rahman has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairmen.
Member
Page: 214
DEPOSITION OF P.W.132, ABDUL QUDDUS ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Abdul Quddus, son of Haji Golam Mia, aged 40 years, by faith a Muslim of Village Koroldanga, P.S. Boalkhali, Dist. Chittagong
TO MR. T. H. KHAN Tendered for cross-examination.
Cross-examination Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 215
DEPOSITION OF P.W.133, MANIRUDDIN AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Maniruddin Ahmed, son of Haji Mokarram Ali, aged 48 years of Village Najarpur, P.S. Baniachang, Dist. Sylhet.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am now attached to S.I. to be Detective Training School, Dacca. I was posted to Kotwali Police Station, Chittagong from January, 1968 to 6.9.68. I seized some registers from the Chittagong Collectorate while I was attached to the Kotwali Police Station, Chittagong. I prepared a seizure list in the presence of witness. I see here the seizure list Ext. P.W.131/1. This is the one that I prepared at that time. The registers marked as Ext. P.W.131/2 and P.W.131/3 were seized by me on that occasion.
I also seized some documents from Hotel Miska on 13.1.68 and I prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses which is now marked as Ext. P.W.133/1, P.W.3/30 is the register which I seized from there on that occasion. I seized it on the strength of a search warrant. I have not got a warrant with me now.
CROSS -EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman
Member.
Page: 216
CORRECTION
19.11.68.
P.W.133 Mr. Maniruddin Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 217
DEPOSITION OF P.W.134, HAJI AHMADUR RAHMAN
CHOWHHURY ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Haji Ahmadur Rahman Choudhury, son of Haji Abdur Rahman Choudhury, aged 60 years, by faith a Muslim of 103, Riazuddin Road Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I know hotel Miska at Chittagong. The Police seized in my presence from hotel Miska a register and prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see my signature on the seizure list marked as Ext. P.W.133/I.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman
Member.
Page: 219
CORRECTION
19.11.68.
The statement of P.W.134, Haji Ahmadur Rahman, has been explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar.
On page 928 in the 3rd line instead of ‘103’ the figure should be only ‘3’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 220
DEPOSITION OF P.W.135, ABDUL HOSSAIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar who will also interpret his evidence).
My name is Md. Abul Hossain, s/o Bhasan Ali Bhuiyan, aged 25 years, by faith Muslim, of village Gualando, Dist. Faridpur.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
East Pakistan Shipping Corporation, Ferry Terminal, Gualando Ghat on 5.3.68. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see here the seizure list which bears my signature now marked Ext. P.W.135/1. The police seized these eight books on that occasion, they are now marked Ext. P.W.135/2, P.W.135/3, P.W.135/4, P.W.135/5, P.W.13576, P.W.135/7, P.W.135/8 and P.W.135/9. I see my signature on the page now marked Ext. P.W.135/10 in the Cargo Invoice Book marked Ext. P.W.135/4. I also see my signature on the page now marked Ext. P.W.135/11 in the book Ext. P.W.135/3. The page now marked P.W. 135/12 in the book Ext. P.W.135/9 bears my signature. So does the page marked Ext. P.W.135/13 in the book Ext. P.W.135/5.
The page marked Ext. P.W.135/14 in the book Ext. P.W.135/2 also bears my signature. The page marked Ext. P.W.135/15 in the book Ext.
Page: 221
the book Ext. P.W.135/7 bears my signature. The page marked Ext. P.W.135/17 in the book Ext. P.W.135/8 also bears my signature.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
besides the books which I have got exhibited today. The seizure was made at about 8-30 A.M. It is correct that if one has to go to Rajbari from Dacca, he has to cross the Ferry Aricha-Gualando. I have been to Rajbari. I know Dr. Asjad of Rajbari.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Page: 222
DEPOSITION OF P.W.136, NASIRUL ISLAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant registrar who will also interpret his evidence.)
My name is Nasirul Islam s/o Haji Md. Mir Ali aged 34 years of Gualando, Dist. Faridpur.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
Pakistan Shipping Corporation, Ferry Terminal, Gualando Ghat. The Police seized some documents from there in my presence. I signed the seizure list that was prepared already marked Ext. P.W.135/1. I see here my signature on the seizure list. I also see here the documents seized then and shown to me, already marked Ext. P.W.135/2 to Ext. P.W.135/9. I see my signature on the pages of these books marked Ext. P.W.135/10 to Ext. P.W.135/17.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I am a business man. I am a stockiest and work as a commission agent. Mine is a registered firm. The search took place at about 10 or 11 A.M.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Chairman.
Member
Page: 223
CORRECTION
19.11.68.
The statement of P.W.136 Nasirul Islam has been read over and explained in Bengali to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar and he now states as follows:
My father’s name is recorded as “Mir Ali’ it should be ‘Meher Ali’ The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 224
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
19.11.1968 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member. (Mr. Justice M.R. Khan has gone to Pindi to take oath as a Judge of the Supreme Court).
For the Prosecution: As before. For the defence: As before. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.137, MR. MD. FAIZUR MIAH ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Faizur Mia, son of Late Zahur Ali, by faith
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am now attached as an A.S.I. to Madaripur Police Station In February, 1968. I was in-charge of Madaripur Police Station. I see here a receipt register part-11 of Madaripur Police Station marked Ext. P.W.137/1. The entry at serial No. 17 is shown to me in this register and is now marked Ext. P.W.137/2. This entry was made on the basis of the
Page: 225
the Police Station on 6.1.1968 on the back of this letter is my report to the effect that I was unable to arrest Mujibur Rahman. (This report is marked Ext. P.W. 137/4). I see a warrant of arrest here issued for the arrest of Mujibur Rahman now marked Ext. P.W.137/5 which was received in our Police Station. On the back of it is reported by the A.S.I. Abdul Latif whose hand writing I can identify. (This report is marked Ext. P.W.137/6). I see also an endorsement below this report by the D.S.P. Afsaruddin on behalf of the Superintendent of Police now marked Ext. P.W.137/7. I recognized the signature of the D.S.P. The warrant of arrest shown to me marked Ext. P.W. 137/8 was received in our police
one is by K, M. Anwar Hossain, O.C. Madaripur Police Station, the second one is by A.S.I. Abdur Razzaque and the third one by A.S.I Abdul Latif. The warrant was returned with these reports. Azharuddin Mollah is one of the dafadars of our Police Station.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The two warrants of arrest marked Ext. P.W.137/5 and 137/8 are copies of each other. Ext. P.W. 137/8 was received on 8th April, 1967 in the Police Station while Ext. P.W.137/5 was received in the Police Station on 14th April, 1967. I cannot say really whether these two are original warrants or copies of warrants. There are reports on the back of both these warrants by different persons. The effect of the report on the warrant was that the man
was reported to have joined his Unit. The letter Ext. P.W.137/3 seems to have been issued on 22nd December, 1967. This was received in our police station on 6.1.1968. I was not aware of the Std. Mujibur Rahman had already been arrested when this letter was received.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 226
CORRECTION
19.11.1968.
P.W.137, Mr. Md. Faizur Mia, has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
should be “Zahur Ali”.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 227
DEPOSITION OF P.W.138, ABDUL JABBAR HOWLADAR ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of The Tribunal interpreted the oath to him in Bengali. He also interprets his evidence in Bengali).
Howladar, aged 42 years, by faith Muslim, residing at Madaripur town, P.S. Madaripur, District Faridpur.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a business man. I know Madaripur Police Station. In my presence on the 26″ February, 1968 some papers were seized by the police from Madaripur Station. A seizure list was made which I signed. I see my signature on Ext. P.W. 138/1. A register and paper were seized. I see here the paper now market Ext. P.W. 138/2 on the back of which there is my signature. The register already marked Ext. P.W. 137/1 was also seized on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I had seen Std. Mujibur Rahman in the village. (No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 228
CORRECTION
19.11.1968.
The deposition of P.W.138, Abdul Jabbar Howladar, has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar and now he states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Page: 229
DEPOSITION OF P.W.139, ANWAR HOSSAIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal interpreted the oath to him in Bengali. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali).
My name is Anwar Hossain son of Addul Wahed Sarder, aged 25 years, by faith Muslim, village Charmugria, P.S. Madaripur, District Faridpur.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a messenger in the National Bank of Pakistan, Madaripur from 1960. In my presence, the police seized some documents from our Bank on the 26th February, 1968. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see my signature on the seizure list Ext. P.W.106/1. I can only write my
(None of the defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and explained and Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 230
CORRECTION
19.11.1968.
The deposition of P.W.139, Anwar Hossain, has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, and he now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Member
Page: 231
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 140, MR, M.R. CHOWDHURY ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
years, by faith Muslim, of village Fulbari, P.S. Golapganj, District Sylhet.
I am Dy. Superintendent of Police (Headquarters) Khulna from 21st of March, 1966. I received the search warrant now shown to me for execution. (This is marked Ext. P.W. 140/1). In execution of this warrant, I searched the office of the Tajmahal Hotel in Khulna and seized boarders register from there, marked Ext. P.W. 109/2. I prepared a Seizure List in the presence of witnesses which I see here marked Ext. P.W. 109/2. It bears my signature. I have also put my signature on page 874 of the register which contains an entry relating to Abdus Samad and Jamaluddin. There is no Shahjahan Hotel in Khulna town. There are many other hotels besides the Tajmahal Hotel but none of them is known as Shajhahan Hotel.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I can name several hotels in Khulna town but not all of them. I am in-charge of town administration at Khulna as D.S.P. I also work in my office. I know there is a hotel called Shaheeh hotel there. Daulatpur P.S. is about five miles from Khulna town. Khulna town now extends beyond Daulatpur and several hotels are scattered all over the city.
(No other counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 232
CORRECTION
19.11.1968.
P.W.140. Mr. M. R. Choudhury has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 233
DEPOSITION OF P.W.141. IDRIS ALI ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Idris Ali, son of late Azimuddin, aged 47 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at 1, Raipura Road, Khulna town, District Khulna.
I know Hotel Tajmahal at Khulna town, on the 7th of March, 1968 police seized a register from that hotel and prepared a Seizure List which I signed. I see my signature on the Seizure List marked Ext. P.W.109/1 which was prepared on that occasion. The register now shown to me Ext. 109/2, is the one that was taken in possession by the police. I had put my signature on the first page and also on the last page. There is no hotel known as Shahjahan Hotel in Khulna town.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAL KHAN
I am the Manager of the Khulna Navigation Company. My office is
A.M. to 1-30 P.M. and again from 3 P.M. to 5 P.M. My residence may
The town of Khulna extends over so seven miles. I have not visited all the hotels in Khulna town. I have been living in Khulna town for a long time and therefore, I can say that there is no prominent hotel known as Shahajahan Hotel. I cannot give the total number of hotels in the town.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 234
CORRECTION
19.11.1968.
P.W.141, Mr. Idris Ali, has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
In the first page of my statement, the working hours should be 9 A.M. to 1-30 P.M. instead of 9-30 A.M to 1 P.M.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Page: 235
DEPOSITION OF P.W.142, MR. GHULAM MEHDI
CHOWDHURY ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Ghulam Mehdi Choudhury, son of late Md. Abdul Karim Choudhury, aged 51 years, by faith Muslim, at present D.S.P. (Headquarters), Bakerganj.
I have been D.S.P. Bakerganj from 18.7.67. The district of Bakerganj is also referred to as Barisal. The search warrant was shown to me and now marked Ext. P.W. 142/1 was addressed to me and I executed it and returned it with my report after execution. I made a search in pursuance of this warrant at Quarter No.3 of IWTA, Colony in Barisal town in the presence of witnesses and took possession of amongst other things. A telephone receiver now marked Ext. P.W. 142/2 and prepared a seizure List now marked Ext. P.W. 142/3. That quarter was in the possession of Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain.
On the same date, I also executed another search warrant issued against the same person by the District Magistrate, Barisal and seized certain maps and a diary. I prepared a Seizure List in the presence of witnesses. I see here the list now marked Ext. P.W. 142/4. The diary seized on that occasion is the one now shown to me. (It is now marked Ext. P.W. 142/5). The maps seized are those shown to me. (They are marked now Ext. P.W. 142/6 to Ext. P.W.142/10).
CROSS-EXAMIINATION OF P.W.142, MR. GHULAM MEHDI
I knew only what was written in the warrants and nothing else about this case. Before the search, I had no knowledge about the facts of the
Page: 237
case in which the search was made. In the seizure list Ext.P.W.142/4, I find that I had also seized one revolver mentioned as Item No. 1 from the same premises. In the warrant Ext. P.W.142/1 there is no mention of a revolver to be searched for. There is also a mention in this warrant that
essential to the enquiry to be made. I had only taken tapes but not a tape recorder from the premises. No recorder was available in that house. I did not listen to the tapes on a recorder after wards. I believe that a sword and a revolver are part of the uniform of a Naval Officer. The maps which I seized from the house were district maps. I do not know whether
received were from the District Magistrate, Barisal. The first search warrant was received at about mid night between 12th and 13th December, 1967 and the second warrant was received at about 3 P.M. on the 13th December, 1967. The first search warrant was executed between 1 A.M. and 4-30 A.M. on the 13th December. There second search warrant was executed between 3-30 P.M. and 5 P.M. Normally what is done is that on receipt of a search warrant the house is blockaded during the night but the search is actually made in the morning. It depends on the circumstances and a search may be made during the night time. One Army Officer was present during the search. I cannot remember his name. I did not ask him to put his signature on the seizure list. He had accompanied me from the District Magistrate’s Office-cum-Bungalow. Two male members and two female members were found in the quarter
signature I obtained on the seizure list. He was the only one whose signature was taken from among the inmates of the house during the search. The warrant marked as Ext. P.W. 142/1 was the second warrant executed on that day. I say this because the warrant mentions a telephone set which is also mentioned in the second seizure list marked as Ext. P.W. 142/3. The seizure lists do not mention that there were two different warrants. I only remember myself that there were two warrants. When I first went there for making the search I noticed a telephone there. I did not try to find out whether the telephone was in working order at that
Page: 238
time. When I went there for the second time I again did not try to find out whether the telephone was in working order. There was another telephone in the premises which was the official telephone. I did not take into possession that official telephone. On the telephone set which I seized, there is nothing written to say that it is an unofficial telephone set. I did not notice anything to say on the other telephone which could indicate that it was an official telephone.
TO COURT
I found out that it was an Official telephone because I enquired from the IWTA officials.
XX-continued:
Two of I.W.T.A. officials were present at the time of the search. Both of them signed on the seizure list. They are Mr. M.M. Abul and Mr. Sayed Momatazuddin Ahmed. At Barisal for using the telephone that I have got in my office, one has to ask the exchange for a particular number to be connected. The telephone number on this telephone set which I see here reads as 682976. My own telephone number in the office is of only three digits. My official number is 349. (On enquiry of the learned Counsel for the defence Mr. T. H. Khan states that the other search warrant had been searched for but is not available). Along with the telephone set a sword was also seized as mentioned in Ext. P.W. 142/3. There were two other Sub-Inspectors of police with me when I went to the house for the search. There were also four other constables
premises first but I cannot remember where it was lying. I have not
that the sword was hanging on the wall of the drawing room. As far as I remember, it was laying somewhere in the house. I cannot remember now what other things were found lying in the house which I seized. I did consider the paper with the name and phone number of Mr. Abdus Sobhan, M.P.A., Parliamentary Secretary, Revenue Department to be a material document that I seized. This particular document was not
Page: 239
specified in the warrant. I considered the sword to be a material object in this sense. For enquiry purpose I thought that the telephone set may also be necessary. I had, during the search, opened almirahs and boxes found in the house. I also upturned the bedsteads. I do not remember having seen any carpet in any room. We broke open the boxes found in the house. I had found the key of the almirahs in a locked trunk which we opened. I cannot remember the number of almirahs in the house. The doors of the bedroom were also forcibly opened. They were locked. That was a pucca building and as I remember a single storied building. There were 7 rooms in the house including two bathrooms. One of the rooms was being used as a kitchen which I also searched. To my knowledge, I made thorough search. There was an almirah in the bedroom, broken and open. During the first search, I had seized some books also, as I considered him to be materials for the enquiry. I was showing the articles which I took up from the house to the Military Officer and he suggested they were taken over. I seized one visitor’s book. I did not, however, go through the entries very minutely. I do not remember any of the entries in that book. In both the searches I had seized some ammunition. At serial No.24 in the seizure list Ext. P.W. 142/4 is a constitution of Pakistan which I considered necessary for enquiry. This was a bare constitution Act. I have not mentioned in the seizure list where the ammunitions were exactly found. I had actually found them as I remember within the almirah in the room behind the hall room. All the ammunitions were found in one almirah. After the first search I went to my own house but I sent the warrant with my report and the articles to the District Magistrate, this was at about 5 A.M. Again, I was called by the District Magistrate at about 3 P.M. I did not see anybody else beside the District Magistrate there. The S.P. was then in his own office.
I do not know whether the District Magistrate had sent for the S.P. or not. I had directed the entry of the things seized in the police station Malkhana’ register. Very likely I think a corresponding entry must have been made in the station diary also. I do not know if the fact that I had made two searches on to warrants has been entered in the station diary. I
Page: 240
station malkhana. In the first seizure list, the commencement time of the search is given but not the time when it finished. The same is the position with regard to the second seizure list. Some of the witnesses were common to the two searches made, but not all. It is not correct to suggest that when I went the second time for the search I only intended to take the telephone set into possession. It is not correct to say that the ammunitions were entered in the seizure list merely to indicate that there was a wider search. After the first search was over, I did not leave anybody to guard the house. I had seen the telephone set during the first search in the morning. One negative photograph of a badge was also seized and is mentioned in the seizure list. (The negative was handed over to the witness and he was asked whether he could say what badge it was). I am unable to say. (The witness was asked whether he could read what was in the negative. He says)- I cannot. (His attention was drawn to the description of the badge in the seizure list in Item No. 9 in Ext. 142/4 and it appears that he has described this badge in the negative fully).
TO MR. ABDULLAH
The Military Officer who was with me gave me to understand that he was a high Military Officer and I understood that he was not below the rank of a Major. I do not know who made the requisition to the District Magistrate for the search warrant. I was ordered by the S.P. on phone to report myself to the District Magistrate. When I went there I found the Military Officer there with the District Magistrate.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination.)
Read over and admitted to be correct. Chairman. Member
Page: 241
CORRECTION
-20.11.68.
P.W.142, Mr. Ghulam Mehdi Chowdhury has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
Instead of the word ‘in’ the 18th line on page 948, the word ‘before’ should be substituted.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Note: Mr. T.H. Khan wants us to note that this witness was offered to be recalled for further cross-examination after the second search warrant had been proved by P.W. 145 but that Mr. Abdus Salam Khan stated that he would not require him or further cross-examination.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 242
DEPOSITION OF P.W.143, MR. ABUL KALAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar will interpret his evidence. )
My name is Abdul Kalam, son of late Bakhtiar Ali aged 32 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at Amanatganj, in Barisal town.
I know the IWTA Quarters in Barisal. In my presence, the police searched one of those quarters. I signed the Seizure List that was prepared then. I see my signature on the Seizure List, Ext. P.W.142/4. I do not remember what articles were seized. I cannot read English and I cannot say what they wrote in the Seizure List. I saw some maps being taken into possession among other things but I cannot give the details of the articles seized.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABBUS SALAL KHAN
I was called from my residence by the police at 12-30 in the night. The search started after my arrival there at the house. Among the persons present there were three police officers and one military officer and one Jalal Mia also accompanied me. Subsequently, two IWTA people also came. I went back to my house after the Azan for Fajar prayer was called out. I do not remember exactly if a revolver, some ammunitions and one pistol holster were recovered among other things or not. Nor can I remember if any ammunition was recovered at all. All the rooms in the house were searched by the police. My house is about a mile from the house searched
Page: 243
No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
CORRECTION
20.11.68.
The statement of P.W.143 Mr. Abdul Kalam has been read over and explained to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar and he now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 244
DEPOSITION OF P.W.144, JALALUDDIN ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Jalaluddin, son of Nawab Ali Sardar, aged 38 years, by faith a Muslim, of Kawnia Branch Road, Barisal town Dist. Barisal.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I know EPIWTA quarters. The Police searched one of those quarters in my presence and seized certain articles. The police prepared a seizure list. I’ see the seizure list Ext. P.W. 142/4 which bears my signature. All the articles seized were entered in my presence on the seizure list. Among the articles seized were some maps but I cannot remember the other details. The maps are entered in Item No. 15 on the seizure list.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIIRUDDIN
I was formerly in police service. I took an invalid pension about the year 1956 on medical grounds. I am in contract business. I have also some contract work with the police. From my house the place searched may be about one mile. The house searched is on the north of the IWTA quarters. I have been to the IWTA quarters before on casual visits. I went there to meet one of my class mates who was serving in the IWTA. I have forgotten the name of my friend now. He belongs to Chittagong. I was in school with him at Pirojpur where his father was a Deputy Magistrate at that time. This was in 1945-46. I do not remember the name of the father of my friend. It was the S.I. of police who called me from my house. I know him from before. His name is Mr. Mannan. He told me to go along with him for a search. It was 1 A.M. when he called me. We went by a Jeep to the place of search. When we arrived there we
Page: 245
found 5 or 6 police Officers were already there. I do not remember whether besides the Police Officers there were other men from the public or any military officer. I stayed at the house of search for about 4 hours. The D.S.P. Headquarters along was searching the house. I do not remember whether all other Police Officers were staying in the Veranda or not. I myself sat in the Drawing room. I know Mr. Kalam. He was also sitting there in the Drawing room. I do not know how many rooms there in the house. I cannot remember now whether Mr. Kalam was already there or he came later when I arrived. There were one or two other persons in the Jeep besides the S.I. I do not remember whether those one or two were police men or from the public. I do not remember if they were in uniform or in plain clothes. Besides the Police Officers in uniform there were two or three persons present in the house when we arrived there. I do not remember in what month the search was made. It was in the cold weather. The officers were wearing overcoats and some people were wearing chaddars. I had a chaddar on myself. There are quarters of other Government officers near the place of search. It is not correct to suggest that I did not witness the search and I obliged the police by putting my signature on the seizure list because of my being an ex-police officer and a police contractor. I did not search the D.S.P. before his starting the search of the house.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
CORRECTION
20.11.68.
P.W.144, Jalaluddin has read over his statement to himself and now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 246
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
20.11.1968 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan has gone to Pindi to take oath as a Judge of the Supreme Court). As per the list enclosed.
For the Prosecution: As before excepting For the defence: Mr. M.M.G. Hafez. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.145, M. A. MABUD ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is M.A. Mabud, son of Alhaj Md. Ali, aged 46 years, by faith a Muslim, at present residing at National Shipping Corporation, National Bank Building, 8th Floor, Mcleod Road, Karachi.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am at present with the National Shipping Corporation, Karachi. Before that, I was the Regional Accounts Officer of IWTA in Barisal from 1963 to the 1st July, 1968. I was residing then in the IWTA Colony at Barisal. In my presence, the Police searched the house of Lt. Com. Moazzem Hussain in the IWTA Colony at Barisal. The Police
Page: 247
prepared a seizure list in my presence which I signed. I see here the seizure list Ext. P.W. 142/3. There were two lists prepared as par possession. According to the second list, an old telephone, a revolver, a sword and some other articles were also seized. Everything that was seized was entered in the lists. P.W.142/4 Is The Second Seizure list which was also signed by me. The telephone in court Ext. PW. 142/2 is the same that was seized. Both the seizure lists were prepared in my presence. As far as I remember, this telephone was recovered from an almirah in the Drawing room.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.145, M.A. MABOOD TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The search started about 12 mid-night and continued till 5 a.m. The second search took place between 3-30 p.m. and 4-30 p.m. I was sent for both times when the search took place. When the house was searched for the first time, the drawing room was also searched. Some cartridges were brought out from an almirah during the second search. I think, as far as I remember, I did see the revolver during the first search which was lying on the top of an almirah. The sword was also hanging on a wall in the room, probably in the bed room. This I saw during the first search. During the first search, all the rooms including the kitchen were searched but not during the second search. Search warrants were shown to us there. So far as I remember, in the second warrant, the names of certain articles were mentioned. In the first warrant, however, there was no mention of any specific article. (The witness was handed over the first search warrant which has been now found after a search and he was asked to say whether this also mentioned certain specific articles or not. On seeing this document, the witness says, “Yes, it does mention some articles, like maps, parcels and documents”). There was one person in civil clothes whom I understood was a military officer. All the articles lying in the almirahs and boxes were examined by the DSP and the military officer, sometimes separately and sometimes jointly and then they decided to take over what they thought fit. The keys of some of the locked almirahs were available and they opened them with these, and the
Page: 248
locks were broken on almirahs whose keys were not available. During the first search the sword was not taken of from the wall. The revolver was examined during the first search but replaced at the very spot where it was found. The books were mostly examined by the military officer and he then separated those which should be seized Lt. Moazzem Hossain was not in Barisal on that day. He has left about a week or so earlier. It was understood that he left for Pindi. As far as I remember he was called by the Dacca Office to go to Pindi. He did draw advance T. A. for going to Pindi. His family was not at Barisal at that time. The office hours in the IWTA where Lt. Moazzem Hossain worked were 7-30 a.m. to 12 noon and 1-30p.m. to 4-30 p.m. Sometimes he also worked beyond 4-30 p.m. and sometimes during the night also. He was a busy officer. I was also sitting in the same building as he sat in. The office is a few minute’s walk from my residence. I saw he was very busy because I passed on my way to residence by this house and sometimes I enquired whether he was in and frequently found he was still in office when I came back. The IWTA has some flat barges and there was some discussion about leasing them to private parties but I do not know what the result was. I had a telephone in my office. The system of telephones in Barisal was that one had to ask the Exchange to give the required number. The telephone seized from the house was not tried. There was a telephone connection in that house and another telephone was there. No one tried to fit this telephone into any connection in the house. The DSP took over the telephone. During second search there was no military officer present at all. There were two other Police Officers with the DSP. He showed me the warrant mentioning specific articles to be taken. Lt. Moazzem Husain had also some control over the Narayanganj office, and he used to go to Narayanganj sometime in that connection. I do not know exactly whether the office hours of Narayanganj are the same which I mentioned or not. On the 13th of December, 1967 I had attended the office. In those days on account of Ramzan the office hours were 7-30 a.m. to 1-30 p.m. or 2 p.m. and for both the searches I was called from my house. The search had not started when I arrived there. I went there with the Police Officer who came to call me. In the second search
Page: 249
another IWTA officer was also present. I did not see any other member of the public present at that time.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. T.H. KHAN
The second warrant now shown to me is the one that the DSP has with him. (It is now marked Ext. P.W.145/1).
(NOTE: Mr. T.H. khan had produced this warrant saying that this has been found after a good deal of search).
I was originally an Accounts Officer in the IWTA.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 250
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 145, MR. MAHBUD ON RECALL
MR. T.H. Khan requests that P.W. 145, Mr. Mabud may be recalled for further examination.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN ON BEING RECALLED
I see my signature on the seizure list Ext. P.W. 146/1. This was prepared in my presence and police seized the documents marked Exts. P.W. 146/2 to P.W. 146/13 from my office. These T.A. bills came to my office on a regular course of business. These T.A. bills come to me in my office after they have been countersigned by the head of the department under whom the officer concerned works we then check the bills from the accounts point of view and pass the bills. All these bills have been passed in our office. In consequence, payment of these T.A. bills must have been made. I recognise the signature of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain. All these T.A. bills are signed by Lt. Moazzem Hossain as the concerned officer on the reverse. I can identify his signatures with which I am familiar. The claimant has also signed the acknowledgement receipt on all these bills. It appears to me that the whole of the writing on Ext. P.W.146/4 is in the hand of Lt. Moazzem Hossain. The same is my answer with regard to Ext. P.W. 146/5 and Ext. P.W. 146/6.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
In Ext. P.W.146/2 and P.W.146/3 some of the writing of the T.A. bills is in my hand, though purpose of the journey is not in my hand. I had made these writings on the oral instructions of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain. After making these writings on these two T.A. bills I
Page: 251
handed them over to Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain. I do not know where and when he signed them. I handed them over to him in the office. I cannot say whether there are any inaccuracies in these T.A. bills.
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness). Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
CORRECTION
20.11.68.
P.W.145, M. A. Mahbub has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
CORRECTION
21.11.1968.
P.W.145, Mr. M. A. Mahbub on recall read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairmen.
Member
Page: 252
DEPOSITION OF P.W.146, MOKFARUDDIN AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATIOM
My name is Makfaruddin Ahmed, son of Abdur Rahman, aged 38 years, residing at Barisal town, Barisal.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a clerk in the IWTA at Barisal Workshop. The head of my department was Deputy Manager Mr. Zakir Khan Majlis. In my presence, the police seized some documents from our office. The police prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see here that list bearing my signatures which is now marked Ext. P.W.146/1. All the documents seized were entered in the seizure list. They included some T.A. bills which I see here. They are now marked Exts. P.W.146/2 to P.W.146/13, I had no direct concern with the T.A. bills. At that time I was maintaining certain files and doing some typing work. I am familiar with the signatures of Lt. Commandar Moazzem Hossain. All these T.A. bills are on the back signed by Lt. Commandar Moazzem Hossain whose signatures I can identify.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I cannot say who prepared these T.A. bills. They are not in my hand writing. Sometimes the officer concerned himself and sometimes the clerk prepares the T.A. Bills. I have been in the IWTA for about 7 years. I served under Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain for about 6/7 months. There are approximately 40/45 vessels in the IWTA. LT. Moazzem Hossain was responsible for the maintenance, repairs and supervision of
Page: 253
these vessels. Transfer and left of the fleet staff were also in his charge. There was a repair base and an electronic repair base at Narayangonj. They were also in the charge of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain. Roughly about 400/500 men may be working on this fleet. The Government had also appointed Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain as surveyor for the IWTA Fleet. Fleet section has not been transferred to Narayangonj so far. A proposal to that effect was, however, made. On Fridays the working hours were from 7 a.m. to 5 p.m. and on other days from 7-30 A.M. to 4-30 P.M. On Saturdays they were only from 7 A.M. to 12 noon. I know that Lt. Moazzem Hossain belongs to Barisal district.
(No other defence Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct
Charimran. Member.
RECALLED BY THE DEFENCE
I am familiar with the signature of Mr. M.H. Furrokh who was Secretary of the IWTA for some time. I see his signature on the two documents shown to me by the learned Counsel. (Those are now marked Ext. P.W. DQ/1 and DQ/2). I know that Lt. Moazzem Hossain wanted to go on premature retirement from the Navy but I do not know on what ground. I see here a copy of a letter handed over to me which was typed out by me under the dictation of Lt. Moazzem Hossain whose signature also appears at the end. (This is now marked Ext. DQ/3).
TO MRT. H. KHAN IN RE-EXAMINATION
In November, 1967 I was posted at Barisal. Mr. Furrokh was then posted at IWTA Headquarters, Dacca. I never served under Mr. Furrokh directly.
I came to know that Lt. Moazzem Hossain wanted to go on premature retirement because I typed out this letter Ext. P.W.DQ/3 for him. The letter was sent to the Naval Headquarters and the original must be there.
Page: 254
(Mr. T.H. Khan says that his objection may be noted regarding the admissibility of this document on the ground that it is only a copy and the original has not been called for).
Chairman.
Member
CORRECTION
20.11.68.
P.W.146, Makfuruddin Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 255
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 147, NAZIR HOSSAIN KHAN ON
My name is Nazir Hossain Khan, son of Iqbal Khan, by faith Muslim, aged 42 years, residing at Pakistan Navy Transit Camp, Dacca.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am posted in the Pakistan Navy Transit Camp, Dacca as an incharge of this camp, from first March, 1968. Before me Master-at Arms Md. Iqbal was in-charge of this camp. Md. Akram was in charge before
office. (This is now marked Ext. P.W.147/1). I have also brought from there Naval Transit Fund Account Book now marked Ext. P.W.147/2. An entry in the register Ext. P.W.147/1 shows at Serial No.4 that Personnal No.958, Instructor Lt. M. M. Rahman, Pakistan Navy of PNS ‘KARSAZ”, stayed in the Transit Camp from 11th July, 1967 to 16″ July, 1967. (The entry is now marked Ext. P.W.147/3). There is also an entry in serial No. 3 in this register in the month of December, 1967. This shows that Instructor Lt. M. M. Rahman, Pakistan Navy of PNS ‘KARSAZ’, Drigh Road, Karachi stayed at the Transit Camp, Dacca from
is marked Ext. P.W.147/4). In the register Ext. P.W.147/2 there is an entry at page 65 which shows that on the 16th July, 1967 Personnel No. 958. Instructor Lt. M. M. Rahman stayed for five days in the Transit Camp at Dacca and paid the amount of Rs. 13.45 for his stay charges. (This entry is now marked Ext. P.W.147/6).
Page: 256
Note: (The witness wants to take away the registers as they are wanted for official purposes. Let him put in certified copies of the relevant entries which have been exhibited in this case. They will be marked with the same Exhibit mark and then he can take away the registers).
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The charge for the stay of officers in the Transit Camp is Rs. 2.69 per day. If a relative Lt. M. M. Rahman stayed for one or two days in the Transit Camp that would have been permitted. Officers, their families and their children are allowed to stay in the transit camp. There is also a charge made for the guests.
TO COURT These registers are kept regularly in the official course of business.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Chairman. Member
CORRECTION
21.11.68.
P.W.147, Nasir Hossain Khan, has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 257
DEPOSITION OF P.W.148, MR. ATIQUR RAHMAN
CHOWDHURY ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Atiqur Rahman Chowdhury, son of Mvi. Azhar Ali Chowdhury, aged 36 years, by faith a Muslim, I am officer-in-charge of the Kotwali Police Station, Chittagong.
To MR. ALIM
I am an officer in charge of the Kotwali Police Station, Chittagong. The warrant was shown to me and marked Ext. P.W.148/1, was received at my P.S. for execution. In pursuance of this warrant searched the PIA office at Chittagong. In the presence of the witnesses, I prepared a seizure list. The seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.148/2 is the one that I prepared and is signed by me. I seized three invoices on that occasion and the invoices are now marked Ext. P.W.148/3, P.W.148/4 and P.W.148/5.
I also received this warrant now shown to me. (It is now marked Ext. P.W.148/6). In pursuance of this warrant, I conducted a search in the PIA office, Chittagong. I prepared a seizure list in the presence of the witnesses. (The seizure list is now marked Ext. P.W.148/7). Certain documents were seized on that occasion which I entered in this seizure list. The telegram marked Ext. P.W.6/3 shown to me and the personal files of Mr. Rameez now shown to me and marked Ext. P.W.148/8, P.W. 148/9, P.W.148/10 and P.W.148/11 were seized by me. I cannot say if I took possession of the Ext. P.W.6/11. Whatever I took I entered in the list.
I see here another search warrant which was forwarded to me for execution. (It is marked Ext. P.W.148/12). In pursuance of this search warrant, I search the premises of the Eastern Automobile Corporation at
Page: 259
Momen Road, Chittagong. I took possession of certain documents in the presence of the witnesses and prepared a seizure list which I see here now marked as Ext. P.W.148/13. I seized a toll collection book under the seizure list. The register marked Ext. P.W.6/5 is the one that was seized on that occasion.
I see here another search warrant which was forwarded for execution and now marked Ext. P.W.148/14. In pursuance of it, I searched the premises of Habib Bank at Laldighi, Chittagong and seized a document in the presence of witness and prepared a seizure list. I see here the seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.148/15 which bears my signature. The cheque Ext.P.W.6/7 was the one that was seized on that occasion. I also search Shahajahan Hotel at Chittagong under a search warrant. I seized the hotel register and prepared a seizure list in the presence of witness. I see here the seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.148/16 which bears my signature. The register I see here is the same which I seized on that occasion. (It is now marked Ext. P.W.148/17).
I also searched the house of Bidhan Krishna Sen in Chittagong and prepared a seizure list of the articles seized from there in the presence of a witness. I see here the seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.148/18 which I prepared on that occasion. The seven documents shown to me now marked Exts. P.W.148/19 to P.W.148/25 are those which I seized on that occasion.
I also searched the house of Bighuti sen Chowdhury at Chittagong and seized certain letters and prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. I see here the seizure list which I prepared, now marked Ext. P.W. 148/26. It bears my signature. I see here the documents which I seized on that occasion. (They are now marked Exts. P.W.148/27 to P.W.148/31).
I also searched the premises of Dr. Syeedur Rahman at Chittagong and seized some papers. I prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. I see it here now marked Ext. P.W.148/32. The documents which I seized on that occasion I see here. (They are now marked Exts. P.W.148/33 to P.W.148/42).
Page: 260
I also searched the office of C.D.A. at Chittagong and seized certain documents in the presence of witnesses. I prepared a seizure list which I see here, now marked Ext. P.W.148/43. The documents which I seized on that occasion are here. (They are now marked Exts. P.W.148/44 and P.W.148/45). Ext. P.W.148/43 is the carbon copy of the seizure list, the original of which was sent to court.
(Mr. Alim says that the original is not traced out).
The carbon were forwarded by me to court on the request of the learned counsel for the prosecution as I was informed that the originals were not traced out. Actually, I had forwarded four such carbon copies of the seizure lists to court because the originals were said to have been not traced out. These four carbon copies have been marked Exts. P.W.148/18, P.W.148/26, P.W.148/32 and P.W.148/43. Those duplicates were attested by the Magistrate who was given the originals by me.
Note: The learned counsel for the defence object to these carbon copies being exhibited.
The learned counsel for the defence request that the crossexamination may be postponed to-morrow because they have to examine the documents exhibited. The witness will be called for tomorrow for cross-examination).
Chairman
Member
Page: 261
DEPOSITION OF P.W.149, ROUSHAN DIN ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Roushan Din, son of Abdur Rashid, aged 46 years, Assistant District Manager, PIA, Chittagong.
I am the Assistant District Manager of the PIA, at Chittagong. The police searched our office and took possession of certain files. I signed the Seizure List that was prepared. I see my signature on the list shown to me, Ext. P.W.148/2. The documents Ext. P.W.148/3, 148/4 and 148/5 were among the documents seized on that occasion by the Seizure List.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
I do not find any endorsement on those three documents of the date of seizure. These documents do not also apparently bear the signature of any police officer or any witness.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Page: 263
CORRECTION
21.11.1968.
P.W.149 Mr. Roushan Din, has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 264
DEPOSITION OF P.W.150, MR. M. RIZVI ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is M. Rizvi, son of Ala Hossain, aged 41 years, Station Manager, P.I.A., Chittagong.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 265
DEPOSITION OF P.W.151, FARID AHMED ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted in Bengali to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar who will also interpret his evidence.)
My name is Farid Ahmed, son of late Siddique Ahmed, aged 29 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at 1, Momeen Road, Chittagong.
I am a lessee of the Shobapur Bridge toll under the C&B and R&H Department. The police seized some articles from my office in 1, Momeen Road, Chittagong in my presence. Police prepared a Seizure list which I signed. I find my signature on Ext. P.W.148/13 the seizure list. The Police took away the toll tax collection book, Ext. P.W.6/5.This register Ext. P.W.6/5 is maintained at the bridge where the toll is collected in the regular course of business.
TO COURT
My office is Eastern Automobiles, Chittagong.
TO MR. ABDUL ALIM
The lessee is our Company known as a pioneer.
Pioneer Trading Company, Chittagong, I am a partner in that company. I work in the Chittagong Office. Our clerk maintains this Register at Shobapur. The clerk’s name is Abdul Motalib. I see here his writing in the Register in the entry in the Register, now marked Ext. P.W.6/5. This is in the hand of Abdul Motalib.
Page: 266
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
21.11.1968. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk, Chairman. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member. (Mr. Justice M.R. Khan has gone to Pindi to take oath as a Judge of the Supreme Court).
For the Prosecution: As per the list enclosed. For the defence: As before accepting Mr. M.M.G. Hafez. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.151, MR. FARID AHMED TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I do not personally work at the Shobapur Bridge. That bridge is 50 miles from Chittagong. Six persons work on the bridge including Darwans. Three of them make entries in the toll register- they work at different times. I can identify the writings of all three. Their names are S.M. Nasiruddin, Noor Mohammad and Abdul Motalib. On the first page of the register, I see the name of the writer of the entries is A. Khan. I cannot say who this Khan is. He might have been a temporary employee. Without seeing the name written in the entries I cannot identify the writings in figures. The writer, as I find, gave his initials in the entries. I
Page: 267
cannot say who the writer is. It is only the writer who can say which entry he wrote. Entries are made when the car crosses either way. We do not allow cars to pass without realising the toll or making any in the register. However, sometimes people do escape. The entries do not show from which side the car passed. There is no second entry regarding car No. KAE 3194 which is entered in Ext. P.W.6/5. I can find no second entry about this car either on 11.7.1967 or the next day. Our office is just at the beginning of the bridge. There is a cross bar arrangement to hold up cars till they pay the tolls. This register ends on the 12h of July, 1967. If one wants to go from Dacca to Chittagong by car this is the only road and the Shobapur Bridge has to be crossed.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
CORRECTION
21.11.1968.
P.W.151, Farid Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 268
DEPOSITION OF P.W.152, SAMSUL ALAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Shamsul Alam, son of late Siddique Ahmed, aged 22 years, by faith a Muslim, of village Changoan, P.S. Panslaish, Dist. Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 269
DEPOSITION OF P.W.153, BISWESWAR SIKDAR ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali)
My name is Bisweswar Sikdar, son of Nikunja Bihari Sikdar, aged 35 years, by faith a Hindu, an accountant of the Hotel Shahjahan, Chittagong
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am an Accountant in Hotel Shahjahan in Chittagong. The police seized a hotel register from our hotel on the 13th of January 1968, in my presence. I signed the seizure list that was prepared on that occasion. I see my signature on the seizure list Ext. P.W.148/16. The register Ext. P.W.148/17 is the one that was seized.
As an accountant, my duty was to make entries in the khatas but not in this register.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
Declined
Chairman.
Member
Page: 271
CORRECTION
21.11.1968.
The statement of P.W.153, Bisweswar Sikdar has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of this Tribunal and he now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member.
Page: 272
DEPOSITION OF P.W.154, BISHNAPADA DEY, ON
SOLEMN AFEIRMATION
My name is Bishnapada Dey, son of Khitish Chandra Dey, aged 23 years, by faith Hindu, of village Akilpur, P.S. Sonagazi, District Noakhali.
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted in Bengali to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal. He will also interpret his evidence in Bengali).
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a clerk in the hotel Shahajahan, Chittagong. My duties are to maintain accounts in the hotel. The Police seized certain documents from our hotel in my presence. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see the seizure list here and my signature on it already marked Ext. P.W.148/16. The police seized this register marked Ext. P.W.148/17 on that occasion. I did not make any entries in this register.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
There are different clerk who from time to time makes entries in this register whenever a guest comes to stay at the hotel. Read over and explained to him in Bengali and admitted to be corrected.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 273
DEPOSITION OF P.W.155, NURUDDIN ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Nuruddin, son of late Abdul Latif, aged 30 years, Officer, Habib Bank, Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am an Officer in the Habib Bank, Laldighi Branch, Chittagong. In my presence police seized some documents from our branch of the Bank. The police prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see here my signature on the list already marked Ext. P.W.114/15. The document Ext. P.W.6/7 was among the documents seized on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 274
DEPOSITION OF P.W.156, MD. MOMTAJUDDIN KHAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Momatajuddin Khan, son of Md. Fouzdar Khan, aged 26 years, by faith Muslim, Manager, Habib Bank, Amirabad Branch, Chittagong.
Tendered for Cross-Examination:
CROSS- EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 275
DEPOSITION OF P.W.157, SYAD RASHED ALI RIZVI,
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Syed Rashed Ali Rizvi son of Enayet Ali Rizvi, aged 33 years, by faith Muslim, Sales Office Supervisor, P.I.A. Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am working as Sales Office Supervisor, P.I.A. Chittagong, since 21st December, 1966. The police seized from our office certain files in my presence. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see my signature on the seizure list marked Ext. P.W.148/7. The files shown to me Exts. P.W.148/8 to P.W.148/11. are those that were seized on that occasion. The documents Exts. P.W.6/1, P.W.6/2, P.W.6/3 and P.W.6/4 were seized on that very occasion under the seizure list. The document Ext. P.W.6/11 is part of the file marked Ext. P.W.148/11 at page 114. The document Ext. DE/2 is also part of the file marked Ext. P.W.148/11 at page 16.
CROSS -EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I have been in the service of the PIA for the last 14 years. I am concerned with the Sales that go on in the Office of the PIA at Chittagong. One of my duties is to concern myself with the general administration of the sales section.
For obtaining a credit ticket on a permanent basis there are certain formalities to be observed and forms to be filled up with a Bank guarantee. For casual credit ticket, there is only the discretion of the District Manager. There need be no written application for casual credit
Page: 277
ticket. Sometimes a mere verbal approach to the District Manager may be enough. We keep record in the office if the District Manager has allowed a casual credit ticket. The name of the passenger and his address are taken down in order that the price of the ticket may be realised in future. For such a casual credit ticket there is a slip prepared which is kept with the auditor’s coupon of the ticket. An entry is also made in a register. In the accounts book also it would be mentioned. The realisation is the function of the accounts office but as far as I know the passenger is directly addressed for realisation. For the credit ticket, it is the duty of accounts section to make the realisation. If the money is not realised for a casual credit ticket, the District Manager who has allowed it is to made the payment. I am not connected with the accounts section. The period of credit ticket is in the discretion of the District Manager. As one enters the PIA office, there is a domestic counter which is the main counter and to one side is the overseas counter. In between them there is a passage. The Reservation Control Office is behind the clerks working on this counter in another room. Just adjacent to the Reservation Control Office is my office and then next to it is the office of the District Manager. There is a connecting door between my office and that of the District Manager. There is a telephone switch board in our office in which sometimes one and sometimes two operators sit. There are five operators in the office who are put on duties by rotation. Each of them serves for 7 or 75 hours. The room is which the operators sit is in the near of the building. The credit tickets are also made out by the sales assistant at the counter. The document Ext. P.W.6/7 is part of the file marked Ext. P.W.148/11. This paper was not taken out of the file in my presence. Nor do I know who took out it. I have identified this document as part of the file from the page number. The page number of this document is 114 and that is missing from the file. I now find that in the file Ext. P.W.148/11 page No.114 is still intact in the file. I now realise that this document may not be part of this file. I now find that this document belongs to the file Ext. P.W.148/9 because page No.114 is missing from this file.
I find now in the file Ext. P.W.148/11 that page 16 is still intact. The document Ext. P.W. DE/2 will not, therefore, be part of this file.
Page: 278
Actually, I now find that this document belongs to the file marked Ext. P.W.148/8. This is the District Manager’s personal file. This Ext. DE/2 is an invoice. We have a separate file for invoices but in that file, we keep only our copies. This particular invoice is the original invoice meant for the passenger. The papers meant for passengers are handed over to them. I find from this document that this document itself bears the address C/O, Mr. M. M. Rameez, District Manager and therefore, presumably it was handed over to him. Those invoices are prepared by the Station Accountant and his subordinates. Usually, these invoices are issued to the passengers within 48 hours. If a letter is received in our office the procedure is this. If the letter carries a personal address it is forwarded to the Officer concerned but in other cases the dispatcher diaries the letters and puts them up to the District Manager who then distributes the letters to the persons concerned.
There was an advertisement by the PIA ‘Fly now and pay latter’ in our push for sales.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
CORRECTION
22.11.1968
P.W.157, Syad Bashed Ali Rizvi has read over his statement to himself and states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 279
DEPOSITION OF P.W.158, MR. JOYNAL ABEDIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Joynal Abedin, son of Abul Kalam Khan, aged 30 years, by faith Muslim. I am Lance Dafadar/Clerk at Rangpur.
I know Ris. Shamsul Huq. He served with me at Chittagong in 1967. In my presence police seized a Motor Cycle from Ris. Shamsul Huq in Rangpur. The police prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see my signature on the seizure list now marked Ext. P. W. 158/1. Ris. Shamsul Huq was already under arrest at that time 29th of April, 1968 is the date of seizure of the Motor Cycle. I have seen that motor cycle outside this Court today. It is lying in the veranda just outside. The Registered No. of the motor cycle is EBC 8529.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUL MALEK
The motor cycle was seized from 26, Cavalry at Rangpur. It was lying in the store of that 26, Cavalry. I had seen this motor cycle with him earlier. It was lying in the store of the Quarter master. I was not present when he was arrested. Before his arrest, Ris. Shamsul Huq was living in the Naval Base, Chittagong and he kept the motor cycle with him there. I had seen this motor cycle with Ris. Shamsul huq in 26 Cavalry Chittagong in December, 1967. I was also in Chittagong in those days and remained there till February, 1968. At the time of
Page: 280
his arrest Ris. Shamsul Huq was posted in Chittagong but he was arrested in Dacca.
(No other Counsel wishes to put any question in cross-examination).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 281
DEPOSITION OF P.W.159, S.I. MANIRUL HUQ ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Manirul Huq, son of Mvi. Suruj Mia Khondakar, aged 39 years, by faith a Muslim now I am attached as S.I. in the port police station. Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am now attached to Port Police Station, Chittagong as S.I. Previous to that I was attached to Kotwali Police Station Chittagong as A.S.I. while I was an A.S.I., Kotwali P.S. Chittagong, I received the search warrant now marked as Ext. P.W.159/1 for execution. In pursuance of this warrant, I went to the Habib Bank, Laldigi branch, Chittagong and seized from there a car numbered EBC 9100, in the presence of witnesses and I prepared a seizure list which I see here now, marked As Ext. P.W.159/2. This seizure list was made on the 19th of April, 1968.
While I was in Kotwali P.S., I also received this search warrant now marked as Ext. P.W.159/3. I conducted the search at the Officer of the Motor Corporation Pak. Ltd., Chittagong 110, Love Lane. I seized certain documents from there and prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. I see here the seizure list now marked as Ext. P.W.159/4.
I took possession on that occasion the Register containing entries already marked as Ext. P.W.6/10 and P.W.38/1.
Page: 282
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I came to learn that the car which is seized had been mortgaged with the Habib Bank. I saw some papers at the Bank which showed that the car had been attached by a Civil Court on behalf of the Habib bank.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examination the witness).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
CORRECTION
22.11.1968.
P.W.159, S.I. Manirul Huq has read over his statement to himself and states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 283
DEPOSITION OF P.W.160, MR. S. M. HAIDER ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is S.M. Haidar, son of Mr. Hossain aged 38 years, by faith Muslim, at present Manager, Habib bank Ltd. Laldighi Branch, Chittagong.
I am a Manager, Habib bank Ltd. Laldighi branch, Chittagong. A car was seized in my presence by the police from our branch of the Bank. They prepared a seizure list which I see here and it bears by signature marked Ext. P.W.159/2. The car number was EBC 9100. We filed a suit for recovery of a certain amount from Mr. M. M. Rameez in the Civil Court and this car had been attached before judgement on our request. As far as I remember, Mr. Rameez had opened an account with our Bank in 1966. After opening the account he had asked for an over-draft. I do not remember if the over-draft was asked from the very day of the opening of the account. It is correct that the over-draft was for the purchase of this car.
CROSS -EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 284
DEPOSITION OF P.W.161, ATAHAR HARIS ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATTON
My name is Atahar Haris, son of Mr. Ismail Haris, aged 43 years, by faith a Muslim, I am a Senior Deputy Controller of branches of Habib bank, Chittagong
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a Senior Deputy Controller of Branches Habib bank, Chittagong. In my presence, the Police seized one FIAT 1100-Car from our Laldigi Branch at Chittagong. I signed the seizure list that was prepared on that occasion. I see my signature here on Ext. P.W.159/2. The seizure was made on the 19th April, 1968.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I have seen a Motel at Cox’s bazar. I have never myself stayed at the Motel there.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman
Member.
Page: 285
CORRECTION
22.11.1968.
P.W.161, Atahar Haris has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 286
DEPOSITION OF P.W.162, NOMANUDDIN CHOWDHURY ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Nomanuddin Choudhury, son or late Arjed Ali Choudhury, aged 31 years, by faith a Muslim, at present; I am an S.I of the Special Branch of Police, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am now attached to the Special Branch of Police at Dacca. Before I came here I was posted with the District Special Branch Office, Chittagong. I seized certain documents from the house of one, Waliullah of Abhoy Das Lane, Dacca, on 9.2.68 and prepared as a seized list in the presence of witnesses. I see here that the seizure list is marked as Ext. P.W.70/1. I also seized the documents, already marked as Ext. P.W.70/2, P.W.70/3, P.W.70/4, P.W.70/5 and P.W.70/6, on that occasion.
I also seized certain documents from the Terminal Superintendent’s Office, Shipping Corporation, Aricha Ghat, on 4.3.68, in the presence of witnesses and prepared a seizure list which I see here already marked Ext. P.W.113/1. The documents Ext. P.W.113/1 to Ext. P.W.113/10 were seized by me on that occasion. I had taken the signatures of the attached witnesses on the documents Ext. P.W.113/2. P.W.113/3, P.W.113/4, P.W.113/5, P.W.113/6, P.W.113/7, P.W.113/8, P.W.113/9 and P.W.113/10.
I also seized certain documents from the office of the Eastern Terminal Superintendent, East Pakistan Shipping Corporation, Ferry Terminal, Goalondo Ghat, on 5.3.68 in the presence of witnesses and
Page: 287
prepared a seizure list which I see here already marked Ext. P.W.135/1. The documents seized on that occasion are here already marked Ext. P.W.135/2 to P.W.135/9. I took the signatures of the attached witness on the pages of the documents marked as Exts. P.W.135/10, P.W.135/11, P.W.135/12, P.W.135/13, P.W.135/14, P.W.135/15, P.W.135/16 and P.W.135/17.
I seized some documents from the office of the Collectorate of Dacca on 30th April, 1968 and prepared a seizure list which I see here marked Ext. P.W.104/1. I took possession on this occasion of the certificate Ext. P.W.104/2 among other documents.
I know house No. 708, Dhanmandi Residential Area, Road No. 13, from that house I seized certain documents on 25.4.68 in the presence of the witnesses and prepared a seizure list Ext. P.W.54/3. On this occasion, I had seized the sale deed Ext. P.W.54/4.
I seized some documents from the Regional Statistical Office, Naya Palton, Dacca, on 6.4.68, in the presence of a witness and prepared a seizure list which I see here now marked as Ext. P.W.162/1.
I seized the documents Ext. P.W.3/59 among other documents. I also seized some documents from the office of the Director, National Institute of Public Administration, Dacca, on 5.4.68, in the presence of witnesses and prepared as seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.162/2. I seized the documents which I see here now marked Ext. P.W.162/3, Ext.P.W.162/4 consisting of 2 leaves and Ext. P.W.162/5.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN There is no search warrant issued for the seizure of the sale deed with regard to the Petrol Pump. I had acted on the requisition of the Investigating Officer. The requisition is not here. The Investigating Officer was Mr. Ahsanullah, D.S.P. of the Special Branch. The requisition directed me to seize the ownership document of the petrol pump. I searched in that connection only once. I had first gone to the petrol pump but was directed to the residence of Begum Hasina Rahman for the document. Concerning this seizure, I visited the petrol pump only
Page: 288
once. I did not visit the petrol pump on any other occasion. In connection with this seizure, I had been to the house of Begum Hasina Rahman only once but I had visited that house on other occasions also. Actually, I had gone there once before. I had gone on that occasion with a police officer of Lalbagh police station for a search. I do not remember whether that search was done on a requisition or a search warrant. On that occasion, the search was conducted by the Sub-Inspector Lalbagh police and not by me.
I had gone with that S.I., Lalbagh, in order to take delivery of the articles, seized there in the search. I did nothing else in the search except for taking the delivery of the documents. I cannot remember now the particulars of the documents or articles seized on that occasion. That is a two storied building. I was during the search on the first floor of the house. Some articles were seized on that occasion and entered in a seizure list. Most probably it was S.I. Wajid Ali who had prepared the seizure list. He is of Lalbagh Police Station. I signed on the seizure list when I took delivery of the articles in acknowledgement of that fact. I produced the articles which I took delivery of, before Mr. Ahsanullah. I do not remember if any diary was included among the articles seized then.
Page: 289
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
22.11.1968. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member. (Mr. Justice M.R. Khan has gone to Pindi to take oath as a Judge of the Supreme Court).
For the defence: As before. For the prosecution: As before. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P. W. 162 CONTINUED
(The witness was handed over a search warrant relating to the search at 708 Dhanmondi Residential Area, Road No. 30. This warrant is now marked Ext. P.W.162/6. He was shown a seizure list now marked Ext. P.W.162/7.
TO MR ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The search was made of 24.2.1968 in pursuance of this warrant at 708, Dhanmandi Residential area, Road No.30. I am unable to say from which place in the house the diary in item No.1 in the seizure list was taken during the search. This item relates to a diary.
Page: 290
It is not mentioned in the seizure list from which place this diary was picked up. The 2nd item in the seizure list is the pocket diary. It is not specified in the list from which place it was taken nor can I remember from where it was picked up. The warrant had been made over to S.I. Wajed Ali for execution and not to me. On the search warrant, I find that there is an endorsement of Mr. Ahsanullah saying that I should execute this warrant with the help of Lalbagh police. But the court has issued the warrant to the O.C. Lalbagh police Station, who endorsed the warrant to S.I. Wajed Ali for execution. The endorsement of Mr. Ahsanullah is dated 22.2.1968 which is the date of the issue of the warrant. It was on the 24th February, 1968 that 0.C. Lalbagh endorsed it to S.I. Wajed Ali. I went there in pursuance of the endorsement of Mr. Ahsanullah on the warrant. I cannot say how many diaries were brought out in the search. Only two diaries were mentioned in the seizure list. (NOTE: Two diaries were handed over by Mr. T.H. Khan, learned counsel for the prosecution at this stage). Mr. Wajed Ali selected the things to be seized from the house. I had no discussion with him about the selection of these materials. I do not know if these things that seized were produced before the court. That might have been done by, Mr. Ahsanullah, I.O. I did not see Mr. Wajed Ali examining the pages of these diaries. Nor did I do it myself. There is no endorsement in the seizure list to the effect that I had taken delivery of the seized articles. I cannot remember now whether any other record exists which might show that I took delivery of these articles.
TO MR. MD. ISMAIL
I do maintain a diary when I go to make a search. I cannot remember whether I made note of this search in the diary. I do not make any entries in my personal diary about any investigation. We do maintain case diary when we go for a house search. In this case I did not search the house and therefore, did not maintain the case diary. (This answer was – volunteered).
Page: 291
TO MR. JULMAT ALI KHAN
I had a search warrant with me for the search made at Walliullah’s house at Abhoy Das Lane. I cannot exactly remember whether I had visited that house before the search or not. I was not ordered to go and arrest anyone from that house earlier than the search. I did not make arrest anybody in connection with this case. I did not find members of the family of Manik Chowdhury in the house when I made the search. I only met Waliullah, the owner of the house there. That is a two-storied house. The search was made on the first floor.
(At this stage of the learned counsel for the prosecution handed over a search warrant to the witness who now says that this is the search warrant in respect of the house searched in Abhoydas Lane & it is now marked Ext. P.W.162/8).
TO MR. JULMAT ALI KHAN
This warrant is addressed to Mr. Israil, Inspector of police. There is no endorsement on the warrant by Mr. Israil asking me to execute the warrant. I had executed it on the orders of Mr. Ahsanullah who was the 1.0. in this case. It was on 9.2.1968 that Mr. Ahsanullah had endorsed it to me.
TO COURT
I have endorsed on the warrant the date of execution to be 9.8.1968.
With permission of the court to Mr. T.H. Khan
I took delivery of the two diaries now shown to me which was recovered among other articles during the house search at 708, Dhanmandi. (The two diaries are now marked Ext. P.W. 162/9 and P.W. 162/10).
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDULLAH
I am attached to a Special Investigation Team of the Special Branch in this case. I had interrogated any of the accused persons in this case, nor any witness.
Page: 292
(No other defence counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
CORRECTION
22.11.1968
P.W.162, Nomanuddin Chowdhury has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 293
DEPOSITION OF P.W.163, ABUL HASHEM ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath has been interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal. He will also interpret his evidence).
My name is Md. Abul Hashem, son of Khalilur Rahman, aged 25 years, by faith Muslim, of village Theuri, P.S-Ramgonj, districtNoakhali
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I live at 185, Sidheswari Road, Dacca. I know the house at 180, Sidheswari Road, Dacca. In my presence, the police searched that house. Some articles were seized from that house and a seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see here that seizure list which is now marked Ext. P.W.163/1. I cannot remember what articles were seized. All the articles seized were included in the list. I see my signature on the back of the letter which was seized on that occasion. (That letter is marked Ext. P.W.163/2). (Item No. 6 in the seizure list was read out to the witness by the learned counsel for the prosecution and he was asked to state whether he could say that a Hill-Men car bearing number ‘Kha-9591’ was seized).
Page: 294
CORRECTION
22.11.1968
The statement of P.W.163, Abul Hashem has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman. Member
He says – yes, it was seized.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I cannot remember now from which place this letter was seized. The letter was in the hand of a police officer who had made the search and who asked me to sign on it. I did not attend any other search in that house. My house is just in front of the house searched. I do not know whether this very house was searched on another occasion also. Mr. Raj and his father used to live in that house which was searched.
TO MR. ISMAIL
My signature on the letter does not bear any date. (No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and explained in Bengali and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 295
DEPOSITION OF P.W.164, MR. MD. REZAUL KARIM
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Rezaul Karim, son of late Munshi Alimuddin, aged 40 years, Sub-Inspector of Police, Special Branch, East Pakistan, Dacca.
On 20.2. 68 I made a search in the office of the IWTA, Motijheel, Dacca and took possession of certain papers from there. I prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses which I see here already marked Ext. P.W.55/1. The documents Ext. P.W.55/2 is the one which I seized on that occasion.
I also conducted a search in the Madaripur National Bank Branch and prepared a seizure list of the documents seized in the presence of witnesses. This is the seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.106/1. It bears my signature. I seized Ext. P.W.106/2 is one of the documents on that occasion. The documents marked Ext. P.W.106/3, P.W.106/4,P.W.106/5, P.W.106/6 and P.W.106/7 were also seized on that occasion. This search was on permission obtained from the Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur by Mr. Ahsanullah, D.S.P. and he then directed me to go and make the search. (The permission accorded by the Deputy Commissioner is now marked Ext. P.W.164/1. The endorsement to witness by Mr. Ahsanullah is marked Ext. P.W.164/a).
I also took possession of documents form, Madripur Police Station on 26.2.68. I prepared a seizure list which is already marked Ext. P.W.158/1. One of the documents seized on that occasion is already marked Ext. P.W.138/2. The register Ext. P.W.137/1 was also taken possession of at that time. My signature also appears in the entry in the registrar marked Ext. P.W.137/2.
Page: 296
I see here the First Information Report now marked Ext. P.W. 164/3. This was recorded by me at the police station, Ramna and it bears my signature. I recorded it on 7.4.67 on the basis of a written complaint by Mr. Abdus Salam. The complaint is attached to this document. (It is now marked Ext. P.W.164/4).
Note: The contents of this report will be relevant only if Mr. M.A. Salam is called as a witness.
I took up the investigation of his complaint and submitted a charge sheet to the Court against one accused person. (This charge sheet is marked 164/5). The accused was Mir Chowdhury. I had seized truck No. EBA 695 and left it with one Mujibur Rahman by the document now marked Ext. P.W.164/6. (This is in Bengali of which an English translation should be put in by the prosecution). I also had taken possession of a Vespa Motor Cycle No. EBA 695. This remained in the custody of the Thana. On this document Ext. P.W.164/6, the signature of Mujibur Rahman was not appended in my presence. I cannot identify the man to whom the truck was given as it was handed over to him by another officer.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 164, REZAUL KARIM TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
In the document Ext. P.W.164/2 there is no specification of documents to be seized. Mr. Ahsanullah had orally told me what papers I should seize. This he told me at the time of giving me this paper. I did not make any note about what Mr. Ahsanullah told me. In pursuance of this paper, I seized six documents from the Madaripur National Bank Branch and two items from the Madaripur Police Station. I have referred to my case-diary for giving this answer. I have brought this case-diary from the Special Branch Office where I had deposited it. This was a case of collision between a truck and a scooter. The case is still pending in the Sessions Court.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 297
CORRECTION
22.11.68.
P.W.164, Md. Rezaul Karim has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Page: 298
DEPOSITION OF P.W.165 MR. MD. SIDDIQUE KHAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Siddique Khan, son of late Khan Bahadur Major Wali Mohammad Khan, aged 38 years, by faith a Muslim, I am a Sergeant of the Motor Vehicles Section under the Supdt. of police, Dacca.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am a Sergeant under the S.P. Dacca, in the Motor Vehicles Section. In my presence, the police seized some papers from our office and prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see the seizure list here Ext. P.W. 104/1, which bears my signature. The office register now showed me the entry that existed marked as Ext. P.W.104/3 was seized on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman Member.
PW165 (partial), PW166, PW167, PW168 and PW169 (partial) documents missing……..
Page: 299
CORRECTION
25.11.1968
P.W. 166, Mr. Syed Momtazuddin has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman. Member
Member.
PW165 (partial), PW166, PW167, PW168 and PW169 (partial) documents missing
CORRECTION
25.11.68
P.W.168, Mr. Syed Anisuzzaman has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
In line 3 at page 1018, the word ‘Pre-flight’ should be inserted between the words ‘Passenger’ and ‘Manifest’. In the third line from the bottom on the same page instead of on ‘dragged’ the word should be ‘dug’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman. Member Member
PW165 (partial), PW166, PW167, PW168 and PW169 (partial)
documents missing………
Page: 300
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT: 25.11.68.
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Defence ….. As before.
Accused present ….. As before. Witness on oath ……. As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.169. MR. AFSARUDDIN AHMED CONTINUED TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I also took the specimen hand-writing of A.B.M. Khurshid accused in 2 sets now marked Ext. P.W.169/27 containing 5 sheets and Ext. P.W.169/28 containing 5 sheets.
accused in 4 sets which are now marked Ext. P.W.169/29 containing 5 sheets Ext. P.W.169/30 containing 5 sheets, Ext. P.W.169/31 containing 5 sheets and Ext. P.W.169/32 containing 5 sheets.
I also took the specimen handwriting of Daliluddin accused in 2 sets now marked Ext. P.W. 169/33 containing 7 sheets and Ext. P.W. 169/34 containing 5 sheets.
Page: 301
I also took the specimen hand-writings of Std. Mujib Rahman accused in 2 sets now marked Ext. P.W. 169/35 containing 5 sheets and Ext. P.W. 169 /36 containing 5 sheets.
I also took the specimen hand-writings of Bhupati Bhushan Chowdhury, alias Manik Chowdhury accused in 1 set now marked Ext. P.W. 169/37 containing 3 sheets.
I also took the specimen hand-writings of Bidhan Krishna sen accused in 1 set now marked Ext. P.W. 169/38 containing 3 sheets.
I also took the specimen hand-writings of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman accused in 1 set now marked Ext. P.W.169/39 containing 3 sheets.
I also took the specimen hand-writings of Lt. M.M. Rahman accused in 2 sets now marked Exts. P.W.169/40 containing 3 sheets and Ext.P.W. 169/41 containing 4 sheets.
I also took the specimen hand-writings of Noor Mohammad accused in 3 sets now marked Ext. P.W.169/42 containing 4 sheets, Ext. P.W. 169/43 containing 4 sheets and Ext. P.W.169/44 containing 5 sheets.
I also wanted to take the specimen hand-writings of Capt. M. A. Mattalib accused but he refused to give any such hand-writing and I noted this fact of this paper now marked Ext. P.W.169/45.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 169, MR. AFSARUDDIN AHMED
TO MR. ZAHIRUDIN
I was directed to take the specimen hand-writings of these accused persons in the Officer’s Mess, Cantonment. I have no exact idea which Officer’s Mess it was. I was told verbally to go to Officer’s Mess. I now find from the documents addressed by the Spl. Supdt of police to the Deputy Commissioner that therein, it is mentioned that the statement had to be taken at 14-Division Headquarters. (The document is now marked as Ext. P.W.169/46). The second order I received is the one now shown to me and marked as Ext. P/W.169/47. Out of persons mentioned the list in this document, I only took the specimen hand-writings of two persons namely, those of Lt. Moazzem Hossain and Lt. Matiur Rahman. In some cases I took the hand writings while sitting in one room and in the case of others I went to their own rooms to take their hand-writings. One or
Page: 302
two military officers were also sitting by my side while I was taking the hand-writings. The specimens were taken in my presence and with the assistance of the Special Branch Officers from the accused persons. The dictation was given to them by the S.B. officers and not by me. Those S.B. Officers in question were Mr. Ahsanullah, DSP, Mr. Israil and Mr. Sattar Chowdhury, Inspector. The diaries and the paper on which the specimen hand-writings were taken were brought by the S.B. officers. There were two or three military officers also in the room. They included Major Naser and Lt. Sharif but I cannot remember the names of the others who were junior officers. Normally I take the hand-writings of accused persons in Court. My attention has been drawn to the
endorsement at the page now marked as Ext. P.W. DR/1 is in the handwriting of either Mr. Israil or Mr. Sattar Chowdhury but below it is my signature. The endorsement on pages S-98, S-99, and S-100 in this diary now marked as Ext. P.W. DR/2, P/W. DR/3 and P.W. DR/4 are not in
by one of the S.B. Officers. The small diary Ext. P.W. 169/1 when produced was a plain diary without writings. It contained no indication that it had been seized by the Police from anywhere. I do not exactly remember but the dictation was given orally by the S.B. Officers to the accused. Nor can I remember if the dictation was given from any particular document.
The endorsements at pages S-170, S-171 and S-172 in Ext. P.W.169/23 are in the hand of Mr. Ahsanullah, D.S.P. but they are signed by me. In Ext. P.W.169/16 the endorsement on the backs of serial numbers S-120, S-121 and S-122 are in the hand of some S.B. Officer but they are all signed by me. In the diary Ext. P.W.169/1 on the individual pages of the writings I have given my endorsement “taken in my presence” and nothing else but in the end, I have given the full endorsement giving the name of the accused. In the end endorsement, it is mentioned that Major Naser introduced this accused to me. As far as I remember I had taken specimen hand-writings of Lt. Commander
Page: 303
occasions for taking writings. I do not think, I took his specimen handwritings anywhere else beside his room. In the diary Ext. P.W.169/19 I see my endorsement on the page bearing the date 27 January. This shows that specimen hand-writings were taken at V.I.P. mess Army Headquarters, Dacca where I understood Lt. Moazzem Hossain was staying. The endorsement in question was made in his room. In the writing Ext. P.W.169/44 the endorsement at page S-56 is not in my hand but it is signed by me. It is not correct that Lt. Moazzem Hossain had complained to me of ill-treatment and torture to which he had been subjected. It is not correct to suggest that these specimen hand-writings
just asked to sign.
I do not remember having recorded the statement of Kamaluddin Ahmed nor of Amir Hossain or Bidhan Krishna Sen. Unless I am given the relevant papers I am unable to remember whether any of them was ever produced before me. It is not possible for me to identify a person who ever produced before me. I never visited the Rajarbagh Centre in connection with this case. I had only visited S.B. City Office in Dacca to meet Mr. Ahsanullah, D.S.P. to make arrangements for taking specimen writings. This was in April or May, 1968. There was no direction from the D.C. or A.D.C. to go to Mr. Ahsanullah but I went to him because I had no conveyance to go in.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 304
26.11.68.
P.W.169 Mr. Afsaruddin Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman. Member Member
Page: 305
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 170, MUMTAZ MIA ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, the oath was interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar. He will also interpret his evidence).
My name is Momtaz Mia, S/o late Yasin Bepari aged 30, by faith Muslim, I reside at 185, Sidheswari Road, Dacca.
Tendered for cross-examination
CROSS -EXAMINATION
I live at 185, Sidheswari Road. No. 180, Sidheswari Road is just
also visited that house at 180, Sidheswari Road for search or not. The seizure list was prepared in my presence by the police and I signed it.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 306
DEPOSITION OF P. W. 171, MD. SHAHJAHAN UDDIN
My name is Md. Shahjahanuddin Ahmed slo late Md. Idris, aged 40 years by faith Muslim, I am Section Officer, Chittagong Development Authority.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am serving in the C.D.A. as Section Officer for the last 5 years. I
time. Mr. Shamsur Rahman Khan was Chairman of this development authority and I served under him. In my presence, the police seized certain documents from our office and prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see here the seizure list Ext. P.W.148 743. It is signed by me. These documents shown to me marked Ext. P.W. 148/44 (four leaves) were taken on that occasion from our office. In Ext. P.W.148/44 the writing within the red pencil is in the hand of Mr. Shamsur Rahman Khan and on the reverse the signature is also his. I am familiar with his hand-writing and signature. The signature enclosed in red pencil now marked Ext. P.W.171/1 and Ext.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
It is correct that Mr. Shamsur Rahman Khan handed over the charge of the Chairman, C.D.A. on 15th September, 1966. He used to occupy a bungalow on I.C.I. hill as Chairman. I do not know if he vacated that house in September, 1966. Mr. M. A. Noor was Secretary of the C.D.A. at that time. I see in the paper handed over to me under the type writing, there appears signature of Mr. M. A. Noor, Secretary, C.D.A. Chittagong which is now marked Ext. P.W. D.S./1.
Page: 307
This paper is a part of the CDA office file. This typed note is about the Chairman’s house. Below the typed writing is the writing of the succeeding Chairman Mr. Obaidullah (It is now marked Ext. P.W. DS/2). The witness was shown an entry at serial number 971 and he was asked to say whether this entry was in the hand of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman and signed by him. The witness says, I am unable to say anything. (The entry for identification is now marked Ext. DS/3). The witness was shown the signature of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman on Ext. 148/44 and asked to compare it with the alleged signature of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman on the entry Ext. DS/3 and to say whether there was any difference). He now says, this signature also looks like the signature of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman. I am familiar with the hand writing of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman apart from his signature. (The witness was also shown the other writing of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman on page Ext. P.W. 148/44 and asked to compare it with the writing in Ext. P.W. DS/3). He now says, the writing in this entry appears to be of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman. When he left the Chittagong Development Authority, I was away on medical leave.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
CORRECTION
25.11.1968.
P.W.171, Shahjahanuddin Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 308
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 172, MONORANJAN TALUKDAR
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Monoranjan Talukdar, son of late Tripur Charan Talukdar, aged 32 years, Steno-typist attached to the Chief Engineer, Chittagong Development Authority.
I was Steno-typist under the Chief Engineer, Chittagong Development Authority. I am still working there in that capacity. In my presence, the police seized certain papers from our office and prepared a Seizure list which I signed. I see my signature on the list Ext. P.W. 148/43 which was prepared on that occasion. The document was shown to me Ext. P.W.148/44 containing four leaves was taken by the police on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
It is correct that Mr. K.M.S. Rahman was transferred from his post
September, 1966. I do not know if he received fare-well parties from the 16th of September to 21″ of September, 1966. There was, however, a party given by the office to his as a farewell party but I cannot remember on what date. I do not know if he left Chittagong on the 21st of September, 1966. I did not go to see him off at the station.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 310
CORRECTION
25.11.1968.
P.W.172, Monoranjan Talukdar, has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Page: 311
DEPOSITION OF P.W.173, MR. ABDUL KADER ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, the oath was interpreted to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar in Bengali who will also interpret the evidence).
My name is Abdul Kader, son of Md. Ishaque, aged 30 years by faith Muslim, at present residing at 67, Battali Road, Chittagong.
I know Dr. Saidur Rahman of Chittagong. I know his residence also. The police seized certain documents from his residence in my presence and prepared a Seizure List which I signed. I see my signature on the list Ext P.W.148/32 which was prepared on that occasion. All the documents seized were entered in that list.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 312
25.11.1968.
The deposition of P.W.173, Abdul Kader has been explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, who now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 313
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted in Bengali to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar who will also interpret his evidence).
My name is Alam Khan, son of Lal Khan, aged 40 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing in Reazuddin Road, Chittagong.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 314
DEPOSITION OF P.W.175, MR. MICHAEL DHAR ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted in Bengali to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar who will also interpret his evidence).
My name is Michael Dhar, son of D.C. Dhar, aged 38 years, by faith Christian, at present residing at 3, Mohim Das Road, Chittagong.
I know the house of Bidhan Krishna Sen in Chittagong. It is at 3 Mohim Das Road Chittagong. In my presence, police sized certain papers from that house. They prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see my signature on the 1st Ext. P.W.148/1/8 which was prepared on that occasion. Whatever, the taken papers were entered in that list.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
Bidhan Krishna Sen is a businessman. (No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Member
Page: 315
CORRECTION
25.11.1968.
The deposition of P.W.175, Michael Dhar, has been explained in Bengali to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar, who now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 316
DEPOSITION OF P.W.176 SHAMBHU DAS ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English the oath was interpreted to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar who will also
My name is Shambha Das, son of Hariprashanna Das, aged 52 years, by faith Hindu, at present residing at 3, Mohim Das Road, Chittagong.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 317
DEPOSITION OF P.W.177, SUKHAMAY BISWAS ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali). My name is Shukhamoy Biswas, son of Daroka Nath Biswas, aged 38 years of village Manira, P.S. Potia, District Chittagong.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I know Bhupati Bhushan Choudhury, alias Manik Choudhury of Chittagong. I do not know his house number but he resides in Ram Joy Mahajan Lane, Chittagong. The police seized some documents from his residence after preparing a seizure list in my presence. This is the seizure list. This seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.148/20, I also signed that seizure list.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
My house is two houses away from the house of Manik Choudhury, I work in the firm of one Praphulla Chandra Choudhury. The Police brought the seizure list to our Gaddio to obtain my signature.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I have known Manik Choudhury for about a year or a year and a half. I know Manik Babu as the Manager of Mustansir Commercial Company. Manik Chowdhury has no Gaddi of his own.
Page: 318
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman. Member Member
CORRECTION
25.11.1968.
The deposition of P.W.177, Bukhamay Biswas, has been explained in Bengali to him by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal and he now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Member
Page: 319
DEPOSITION OF P. W. 178, BANKIM CHANDRA
DUTTA ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English, Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant registrar of the Tribunal, will interpret the oath as well as the evidence of the witness in Bengali).
My name is Bankim Chandra Dutta, son of late Paresh Chandra Dutta, aged 54 years of village-Habilaship, P.S. Potiya, Dist. Chittagong.
I know Bhupati Bhushan Alias Manik Choudhury. I also know his home in our village. I know his residence in Chittagong town also. The O/C prepared seizure list in the firm of Praphul Ranjan Choudhury. When I was passing by that firm I was called by the O/C there. Two letters were sought to be seized by that seizure list. Those two letters seizured were shown to me in that Gaddi of Praphulla Ranjan Choudhury. I do know not wherefrom those two letters were taken. A seizure list was prepared and I was asked to sign on that and I signed it. I see my signature on the seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.148/26. I do not know Mustansir Commercial Company. (Now the witness says) I know Muntansir Commercial Firm is located in the next adjacent tin-shed to the place of Praphulla Ranjah Choudhury’s Firm. The Gaddi of Praphulla Babu is also located in a pucca walled building with a tin-roof.
I know Nalini Ranjan Garkar. He works at the Gaddi of Praphulla Ranjan Choudhury.
Page: 321
(At this stage the prosecution counsel seeks to leave have the witness declared hostile so that he can cross-examine the witness. The prayer is granted to do so).
CROSS- EXAMINATION TO MR. T. H. KHAN
It is not correct to say that I am deposing falsely to help Manik Choudhury. As a matter of fact, I have litigation against Manik Choudhury (This part was volunteered). It is not correct that Nalini Ranjan Sarkar produced this document which was seized by the police. As a matter of fact, this seizure list had been prepared by one half when I was called from the road to witness the seizure list. This was done while I was going to my maternal uncle’s house.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I have no house at Chittagong town. I occasionally visit Chittagong town.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
Manik Choudhury is a member of the Habilashdwip Union Council. Manik Choudhury has got vast landed property in his village. Manik
(No other counsel wishes to cross examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 322
CORRECTION
25.11.1968.
The deposition of P.W.178, Mr. Bankim Chandra Datta has been
who now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Page: 323
DEPOSITION OF P.W.179, MAFZAL AHMED CHOWDHURY ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Mafzal Ahmed Choudhury, son of Nazir Ahmed Choudhury, aged 48 years. I am the Nazir of the Chittagong Collectorate since June, 1964
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
The Deputy Commissioner, Chittagong, is the controlling authority for the Govt. House Chittagong. There is a Care-taker in that Govt. House. This Govt. House is located in the north of Chittagong Stadium. It was formerly known as Circuit House. I see one register of the Govt. House, Chittagong. It is maintained there regularly. (This register is now
759 at page 62 and the witness says). This entry relates to P.N. Ojha, the First Secretary of the Deputy High Commission of India, Dacca. (It is now marked as Ext. P.W.179/2). This entry further shows that he arrived at the Govt. House on 29.7.66 at 10 A.M. and left the Govt. House on 1.8.66 at 7 a.m. There is also an endorsement in this column that he paid for his stay but the amount is not specified there in.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 179, AHMED CHOUDHURY
TO MR. A. MOMEN
There are some Govt. Motels in Cox’s Bazar under the control of the Sub-divisional Officer, Cox’s Bazar.
Page: 324
179/1 and was asked to see the serial No. 662. The witness stated) This serial No. relates to Mr. Ruhul Quddus, CSP.
(The entry is now marked as Ext. DT/1.) This entry further shows
House on 1.4.66 at 3 P.M. Mr. Ruhul Quddus was the Additional Commissioner, Chittagong Division, but I cannot recognize his signature.
I cannot say whether Mr. Ruhul Quddus was the Additional Commissioner in Chittagong Division in 1966 or not.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I find the entries at serial No. 759 were first made and them scored out throughout. The next entry was to my mind not 760 and has been altered to 759.
The next entry is now 760 but it appears that it was previously 761. The date of arrival against serial No. 759 is 29.7.66. & the date of arrival against serial No. 760 is 30.7.66. The next entry on the next page is 761. It is now 761 but it appears that previously it was 762 which has been altered. Against this serial No. also the date of arrival is entered in this register as 29.7.66. The S.D.O. Cox’s Bazar is under the administrative control of the Deputy Commissioner, Chittagong. The Deputy Commissioner does the inspection of all Sub-divisional Officer’s offices in the district including that of Cox’s Bazar. Against entry No. 759 there is no signature of Mr. P.N. Ojha.
(Further cross-examination declined.)
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 325
CORRECTION
P.W.179, Mr. Mofzal Ahmed Chowdhury has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
The statement is correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 326
DEPOSITION OF P.W.180, MR. SERAJUL ISLAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Serajul Islam s/o Mvi. Wali Ahmed, aged 38 years, by faith Muslim. I am Assistant Director of Basic Democracies,
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I have been Assistant Director, Basic Democracies Department, Government of East Pakistan since 17.4.68. Prior to that, I was a Magistrate, 1st Class Officer, in Dacca. I recorded the statement of Md. Nawab Ali son of Atahar Ali, Village Gurra, P.S. Singair,
produced before me by Mr. Rezaul Karim, S.I. of police, Special Branch, Dacca who identified him to me. I administered oath to Nawab Ali before recording his statement. I recorded his statement correctly and then read out the statement to him. He admitted it to be correct and signed it thereafter. This is that statement I recorded in Bengali which is now marked Ext. P.W.180/1. (The English translation of this statement is marked Ext. P.W.180/2.) I have seen
original except that the sentence reading as “In the year 1964 I got the licence” was omitted in the translate after the sentence reading as “My licence No. is EBH 2500. The words, “In 1964″ preceding the words “I got my employment” are redundant & should be deleted. The rest of the translation is correct.
Page: 327
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
The Sub-Inspector who produced the witness before me was not known to me before. He was not in uniform. He identified himself to me as Sub- Inspector of Police. He also came along with a record sent to me by the S.D.O. (South) Dacca where in I was requested to record the statement of Nawab Ali. The witness was also sent along with the record. In the order of the S.D.O. however, the name of Rezaul Karim is not mentioned and it was stated therein that Inspector A. Samad Talukdar produced the witness before the S.D.O. I do not know whether this Abdus Samad Talukdar was an Officer of the Special Branch or not. The order of the S.D.O. however, he mentioned that Abdus Samad Talukdar was a member of the Special Team of the Special Branch. I do not know Nawab Ali from before. I had a busy file and had a police Sub-Inspector attached to my court. I do not remember the time when the statement of Nawab Ali was recorded. I recorded the statement of Nawab Ali as he stated to me correctly without adding or omitting any part of it.
(Further Cross -Examination declined.)
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman. Member. Member
CORRECTION
26.11.68.
P.W.180, Md. Serajul Islam has read over his statement to himself
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 328
– 1053 –
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 181._MB_.A.Q. CHOUDHURY
• Av_SOLEMN AFFIRMATION –
My name 18 A.Q. Choudhury S/o late A.H. Choudhury, aged 51 yeers, by faith Muslim , Magistrate ftrat Class, Dacco.
TOUR. I. 1. KHAN :
FOR the last 2 years I have been a
Magistrate first class at Decce. I WAS deputed
to take specimen hand writing of ud. Amir
Hossain Mia, I took his speciment hand writtings
and signatures in the documents now marked Ext.p.w.181/1
contd…
Page: 329
DEPOSITION OF P.W.181. MR. A. Q. CHOUDHURY ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A. Q. Choudhury S/o late A.H. Choudhury, aged 51 years, by faith Muslim, Magistrate first Class, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
FOR the last 2 years I have been a Magistrate first class at Dacca. I was deputed to take specimen hand writing of Md. Amir Hossain Mia. I took his specimen hand writings and signatures in the documents now marked Ext. P.W.181/1
This Md. Amir Hossain Mia was identified and introduced to me by Major A.B. Naser.
I had T.I. parade on three days in this case. I was deputed to do so by this order marked Ext. P.W. 181/2. I held T.I. parade first on 18.5.68 in Military Custody room in Dacca Cantt. On that day the identifying witnesses were Mr. M.M. Sayeed, son of Mr. A. Washed of Hotel green, Dacca and Mr. Gholam Mostafa Choudhury, son of late Hosain Jan
included, No.(1) Manik Choudhury, Alias Bibhuti Bhusan Choudhury Alias B.B. Choudhury, son of Dhirendra Lal Choudhury of 41, Ramhoymaha Janpurpara lane, Chittagong and No. (2). Bidhan Krishna Sen Alias B.K. S/o late Dr. Rajindra Narayan, son of Saroatala, P.S. Boalkhali, Chittagong. The two suspects were mixed up with 20 other persons who were almost similarly dressed and of almost the same social status. The T.I. parade was conducted under conditions precluding the possibility of collusion. The witnesses were kept 500 yds. away from the
Page: 330
place where the suspects were kept and from where the T.I. parade took place.
The witness was brought one by one for identifying the suspects. The possibility of witnesses seeing the suspects before the parade was not there. The suspects were detained in Military Custody in a room different from that where the T.I parade was held. The witness Mr. M.M. Syeed identified the suspect Manik Choudhury. He also identified the suspect Bidhan Krishna Sen. He identified then as the person who resided in his hotel as temporary boarders. The witness Gholam Mostafa Choudhury identified the suspect Manik Choudhury as the person who had occasionally stayed in his hotel as a temporary boarder. He also identified the suspect Bidhan Krishna Sen as the person whom he had seen with Manik Choudhury in his hotel occasionally.
I also held T.I. parade on 20.5.68. The T.I. parade was held in the Military custody room in the Dacca Cantt. Ruhul Amin, son of Abdus Salam Miaji, Manager, Hotel Denofa was the only witness for identification in that parade. The suspects were (i) Daliluddin, son of Hafizuddin of Shampara, (ii) Std. Mujibur Rahman, son of Munshi Abdul Latif of Ghatmajhi, (iii) Md. Ali Reza, son of Jahur Ali Ahmed of Lahini, Kustia, (iv) A.B.M.A. Samad, son of Entaj Ali Mridha of Mithakhali, P.S. Mathbaria, District Barisal. The suspects were mixed up with 40 other persons who were similarly dressed and coming from similar social status. The suspects were kept at a distance of about 500 yards. away from the identifying witnesses from where they could not be seen by the witnesses. The witnesses were called one by one. After one
Page: 331
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
26.11.1968. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman, Mr. Justice M. R. Khan, S. Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 181, MR. A.Q. CHOUDHURY CONTINUED TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I also held T.I. parade on 20.5.1968 in military custody room in Dacca Cantt. The suspects included in the parade were (1) Std. Mujibur Rahman, son of Munshi Abdul Latif of Ghatmajhi, P.S. Madaripur, District Faridpur, (2) A. B. Khurshid, Alias Panno, son of Abdul Jabbar, of Saber Cottage, Faridpur town and (3) Manik Choudhury Alias B.B. Choudhury alias Bhushan Choudhury, son of Dhirendra Lal Choudhury, of 41, Ramjoy Mahajanpur Lane, Chittagong. They were mixed up with 30 other persons almost similarly dressed and of almost similar social status. There was one identifying witness, Ruhul Amin, son of Ali
Page: 333
Ahmed Miaji of Soatala, P.S. Fatikchhari, Chittagong. He was liftman of Hotel Miska, Chittagong. The identifying witness was kept away from the place of parade at a distance of about 500 yards, wherefrom he could not see the suspects. He was then called in and he identified suspects Std. Mujibur Rahman and Manik Choudhury as the persons whom he was in Hotel Miska about two years ago. He could not identify the suspect Khurshid.
On the same day, I held another T.I. parade in a military custody room in Dacca Cantt. The suspects were (i) Std. Mujibur Rahman, son of Munshi Abdul Latif of Ghatmajhi, Madaripur, District Faridpur (ii) Sultanuddin Ahmed (S.U. AHMED), son of Shamsuddin Ahmed of Uttarkhamar, P.S. Kapasia, District Dacca, (iii) A. B. Khurshid alais Panno, son of Abdul Jabbar of Saber Cottage, Faridpur and (iv) Manik Choudhury alias B.B. Choudhury alias Bhupati Bhushan Choudhury, son of Dhirendra Lal Choudhury of 41, Ramjoy Mahajanpur Lane, Chittagong,. They were mixed up with 40 other persons almost similarly dressed and of almost the same social status. The identifying witnesses were (1) Md. Saleh Ahmed, son of Ahmed Hossain, Manager, Hotel Miska, Chittagong, (2) Khoka Barua, son of Hriday Rahman Barua a Boy of Hotel Miska. These identifying witnesses were kept at a distance of about 500 yards away from the place of parade from where they could not see the suspects. They were called in one by one. When the first witness had finished his identification he was detained in a separate room till the whole parade was over. The witness, Saleh Ahmed identified the suspects Std. Mujibur Rahman, Sultanuddin Ahmed and Manik Choudhury as the persons whom he had seen in hotel Miska about two and a half years ago when Sheikh Mujibur Rahman went there. Khoka Barua identified the suspects Std. Mujibur Rahman and Khurshid Uddin Ahmed as the persons whom he had seen in Hotel Miska in 1966. He could not identify the suspect Sultanuddin Ahmed and B.B. Choudhury.
I held a T.I. parade on the veranda of military custody room in Dacca Cantt. There was only one suspect Sultanuddin Ahmed, son of Shamsuddin Ahmed of Uttarkhamar, P.S. Kapasia, District Dacca. He
Page: 334
was mind up the 10 other persons almost similarly dressed and of almost similar social status. There was one identifying witness, Ruhul Amin, son of Ali Ahmed Miaji, Liftman of Hotel Miska, Chittagong. He was kept at a distance of about 500 yards from the place of parade wherefrom he could not see the suspect beforehand. He was then called in and he identified the suspect Sultanuddin Ahmed as the person whom he had seen in Hotel Miska in 1966.
On 21.5.1968 I also held T.I. parade on the veranda of the military custody room in Dacca Cantt. The suspect was Amir Hossain, son of Mir Fazil Molla of Rupbabur Char, P.S. Janzira, District Faridpur. The suspect was mixed up with 10 other persons almost similarly dressed and of almost the same status. The identifying witness Makhanlal Ghosh, son of Abhimonnu Ghosh, Cashier of Hotel Arzoo, Dacca. He was kept at a distance of about 500 yards. from the place of T.I. parade so that he was out of sight of the suspect. Then he was called in and he identified the suspect Amir Hossain as the persons, whom he had seen in his hotel in February, 1966.
On the same day, I held another T.I. parade on the veranda of a military custody room in the Dacca Cantt. There were two suspects- (i) Amir Hossain son of Mir Fazil Molla of Rupbabur Char, P.S. Janzira, District Faridpur and (2) Dr. Saeedur Rahman son of late Abul Khair of Reazuddin Bazar, Chittagong. The two suspects were mixed up with 20 other persons almost similarly dressed and almost of the same social status. The identifying witnesses were (i) Ruhul Amin son of Ali Ahmed Miaji, liftman, Hotel Miska, Chittagong (2) Khoka Barua, son of Hridoy Ranjan Barua, a boy of hotel Miska, Chittagong. The identifying witnesses were kept at a distance of about 500 yards from the place where the parade was held so that the suspect was out of sight and hearing of persons included in the T.I. parade. I called them one by one and after one had finished his identification, he was detained in a separate room till the other witness finished the identification. The witness Ruhul Amin identified the suspect Amir Hossain as the person who had stayed in Hotel Miska in 1966 as a temporary boarder. He could not identify the other suspect. The witness Khoka Barua identified the
Page: 335
suspect Amir Hossain as the person whom he had seen in Hotel Miska in 1966. He failed to identify the other suspect.
I held T.I parade on the same day on the veranda of a military custody room of the Dacca Cantt. There were two suspects
(i) Mr. M.M. Rameez, son of M.M. Siraj of village Dhanu, P.S. Rupganj, District Dacca and (ii) Anwar Hossain, son of Dr. Rahim Baksh of Panpanchil, P.S. Sirajganj, District Pabna. There were two identifying witnesses-(i) Abdul Wahab, son of Matu Mia Chowkidar, C&B., Feni, Noakhali (ii) Ruhul Amin, son of Abdus Salam Miaji, Manager, Hotel Denofa, Feni. These witnesses were kept at a distance of about 500 yards. from the place of the parade so that they were out of sight and hearing of the suspects. The suspects were mixed up with 20 other persons almost similarly dressed and on almost similar social status. The witnesses were called in one by one and after one had finished his identification he was detained in a separate room till the other one had finished. The witness Abdul Wahab identified suspect M. M. Rameez and Anwar Hossain as the persons who had stayed in the Dak Bungalow in Feni in July last year. Ruhul Amin failed to identify any of the suspects.
I held another T.I. parade on the same day in a veranda of a military custody room in the Dacca Cantt. The suspect was Dr. Saeedur Rahman, son of late Abul Khair of Reazuddin Bazar, P.S. Kotwali, Chittagong. The identifying witness was Mr. M. M. Saeed, son of late Abdul Wahed, Manager, Hotel Green, Dacca. The identifying witness was kept at a distance of about 500 yards from the place of the parade so that he was out of sight of the suspect. The suspect was mixed up with 12 other persons almost similarly dressed and coming from almost similar social status. When the witness was called in the identified suspect Dr. Saeedur Rahman as the persons who stayed on many occasions in Hotel Green.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO KHAN BAHADUR NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
I did not know any of the identifying witnesses or the suspects before I held the parade. I did not note the height of various persons whether
Page: 336
suspects or the other in the parade. Nor did I notice the difference of their complexions in the Memorandum. I did not note down the dresses those people were wearing in the parades. I did not consider it necessary whether any of those persons were fat or lean.
TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
The room in which the witness who had finished identification detained was not visible to me from where I was but I had put a guard on that room (This latter part was volunteered by the witness.) The place from where new witness was to come, was not also visible to me from where I was. I had come out occasionally to verify that they, the two types of witnesses, could not communicate with each other. After I came back I could not see whether there was possibility of any contact between the two types of witnesses or not. I do not exactly remember whether any other bald headed man was included in the parade in which Amir Hossain Mia was identified but in presume I must have included some. I do not exactly remember how many other bald-headed men were thus included. I had seen some villagers standing outside the room where the T.I. parade was held and I had selected some of the persons from them. I did not know them before.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I cannot give the location of the custody room in which I held the T.I. parade. I had gone to the Cantonment 3 times to hold parades. If I am asked now to point out that place I may be able to do so. The room in which the parade was held was about 20×30′ feet. There may be a difference of 4′ feet or 5′ feet either way in the dimensions I have mentioned. The identifying witness were kept in an open space. That behind one building. I cannot say what building may be about 480 yards away from the place of the parade. The building was one-storied. I found no person inside that building at that time. As far as I remember, that building is towards the north of the place of parade. There were 2 or 3 rooms adjacent to the room in which I held the parade. I found nobody in those rooms at the time I held the parade. I was told that all the rooms
Page: 337
were custody rooms. I think it was Major Naser who gave me this information. I made some preliminary notes for my memorandum while standing without sitting down. Later on, after the parade was over I sat down. Throughout the T.I parade I kept standing. When the witness was going along to identify the suspect, I also walked with him. When 40 persons were mixed up with the 4 suspects, I had them standing in 2 rows. I walked along with the witness in front of the second row also. The distance between the 2 rows was 5 cubits. I did not see Manik Choudhury before he was included in the parade. I picked up the persons to be mixed up with the suspects after the suspects had arrived. The suspects were brought from another custody room which I did not see. They were produced before me in the room. The persons from whom I saw other to be mixed up with from the room where I held the parade. They were already present there and I did not go there to collect them. There were 50 or 60 such people standing there. I do not know who had collected them. I know the Cantonment area is secluded, it is not totally a prohibited area. I do not know who gave the instruction for collecting those people. The persons thus collected were not visible from the place where I held the parade. I did not ask the rest of the people after selecting 40, to stay there. Actually, I asked them to go away. These 40 people were villagers.
Those 40 people were wearing different clothes some had lungis and others had pyjamas, trousers and shirts. Mr. Manik Choudhury as far as I remember was wearing a Dhoti in one of the parades and on other occasions he was wearing Payjama. I have not mentioned this fact in my memorandum. I gone out to call for the witness to be brought and I saw him emerging from the side of the building behind which they were kept. I sometimes saw such a witness coming after naming the witness to be called and then I went inside the room and on other occasions, I did not see the witness coming. The building in which the parade was held faces the building behind which the witnesses were kept. Between the place of parade and the building behind which the witnesses were kept, there may be some small huts but I do not now remember. There was no path way leading from the road to the place of parade.
Page: 338
In the 3rd column of the memorandum I did not fill up the particulars as to where the witnesses were alleged to have seen the suspects and in what circumstances. At the end of the T.I. the parade I had filled up the remarks column and mentioned therein in what circumstances and where the witnesses had seen the suspects. I had no idea of the actual social status of Manik Choudhury but I decided the status of the person from the general dress and appearance. I had not recorded at what time Manik Choudhury suspect was brought before me. I only saw him when he was brought into the room where the T.I. parade was held. I took only 2 to 3 minutes to decide what sort of social status the suspect had. I then gone out about a 100 yards distance to select the people from the gathering. I do not remember how many of the persons thus selected were wearing lungis. I do not think that anyone of them was wearing ganijis only with the lungis. I cannot now give the number of people with Payjamas whom I selected or with trousers. I do not remember what Manik Choudhury was wearing on 18.5.68.
I cannot remember what dress was worn by each suspect on any particular day. For each parade, my answer is the same that I cannot
selected. Manik Choudhury is of medium height I believe. I would regard 5′ 2″ or 5′ 3″ as a medium height. There was one door and 1 or 2 windows in the parade room. There were no connecting doors between the room in which the parade was held and the adjacent rooms. I did inspect all the adjacent rooms. I did not record any of these facts in my memorandum. I have not specified in any of the memoranda that the witnesses were kept at a distance of about 500 yards from the place of parade nor they were kept behind the building nor have I recorded that the persons from whom the selections of others were made were at a distance of 100 yards nearly from the place of parade.
To the south of the building in which the T.I. parade was held, there was a pucca road. I do not remember if the open space beyond that road may be only 25/30 yards. My car stopped on the eastern side of the building in which the custody rooms were located. From there I passed one room and entered the room in which the parade was held. I had to
Page: 339
turn west-ward from the main road to go there. There is a veranda in front of the T.I. parade room. It is an open veranda which is visible from all sides. What I meant is that the veranda was visible from the court yard but not from beyond where there were buildings. The court yard was 30 x50 cubits. The road is to the east side of this court yard and not in front of it. Beyond this court-yard, there are some huts and then beyond the huts, the building behind which the witnesses were kept and that building behind which the witnesses were kept and that building may be about 480 yards away from the court yard. I cannot remember now how many huts are there in between the court yard and the building where the witnesses were kept. It may be two or three. I cannot give the location of these cottages exactly. The veranda, I believe, is on the northern side of the building. The building in which the T.I. parade room is located is visible from the road on the eastern side. The veranda would also be visible. The suggestion that the witnesses were not kept 500 yards away from the T.I. parade room is not correct. It is not a fact that the persons from whom I selected others to be included in the parade, were not at a distance of 100 yards from the place of parade and that I did not go personally to select the persons. It is not a fact that I did not go out from time to time to watch the appearance of the witness and the place. It is not a fact that I did not know where the witnesses had been kept or from where they had been brought. It is not a fact that the suspects were shown to the witness before they came from behind the building. Major Naser had introduced the suspects to me, but even he was not present at the time when the parade was held. It is not a fact that the bald-headed man Amir Hossain Mia was sitting with me in the varandah before I held the T.I. parade.
(With permission of the Court.)
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I know the limits of the cantonment area beginning from the north side towards the south. While coming from the city side towards cantonment there is a signboard on the road showing start of the limits of
Page: 340
the cantonment. The northern limit of the cantonment is near the New Airport which is under construction. There is a bus service going through the cantonment. There is also a residential area in the cantonment and also a bazar area. While going from there towards the city on the road one finds to the right residential areas, some open spaces and some villages.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 341
CORRECTION
27.11.1968.
P.W.181, Mr. A. Q. Choudhury has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
At page 1054, in the 3rd line from the bottom, the word “about’ should be inserted before the figure ‘500’. At page in the second line from the top the word “almost’ may be inserted before the figure 40′. At page 1064 in the 2″ line from the bottom the word ‘notice should be replaced by the word ‘note at page 1065 in the 3rd line from the top the words to note should be inserted after the word ‘necessary’. At page 1067 in the 12th line from the top wish to correct myself. The word ‘south’ should replace the word ‘north.’ At page 1068 in the 4th line from the top the word “about should be written before the figure & word “5 cubits’. At page 1072 in the 3rd line from the bottom the word ‘where should be replaced by the words behind which’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 342
DEPOSITION OF P.W.182, A. K. M. MOSLEHUDDIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A.K.M. Moslehuddin son of Abdul Gafur, aged 45 years, by faith Muslim, Sub-Inspector of Police Special Branch, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am attached to Special Branch Police, Dacca since September, 1966. On 14.2.68 I seized some documents from National and Grindlays Bank Ltd. Motijheel, Dacca and prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. The list already marked Ext. P.W.64/1 is the list that I prepared on that occasion. The cheque Ext. P.W.64/2 is the document which I seized on that occasion.
On 8.3.68 I seized one original joining report of Amir Hossain Mia from the C.S.O. Regional Office, Dacca. I prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses which I see here already marked as Ext. P.W.90/1.
On 6.3.68 I seized three log books from the office of SubDivisional Engineer, Nithikandi Sub-Division, Road Construction Division No. 11, under R&H. Department at Katchpur and prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. The seizure list which I see here already marked Ext. P.W.11/1 was the one which I prepared on that occasion. These three log books are shown to me already marked Exts. P.W.111/2, P.W.111/3 and P.W.111/4 are the log books which I seized on that occasion
On 10.2.68 I seized six cheques from the National Bank of Pakistan, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca in the presence of witnesses and prepared a
Page: 344
seizure list which I see here already marked Ext. P.W.74/2. one of those cheques is now here already marked Ext. P.W.74/3.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I have been inside the court room on some days during the proceedings in the court. I came in Court to help Mr. Khalique on these occasions. Mr. Khaleque is the D.S.P. assisting the prosecution Lawyers.
(No other Counsel wishes to Cross Examine the witness.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 345
DEPOSITION OF P.W.183, MR. IQBAL OSMANI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Iqbul Osmani, son of Nazir Ahmed Osmani, aged 48 years, by faith Muslim, at present at No. 2 provost and Security Unit, Karachi.
I am Warrant Officer Since, 1967, and posted at No. 2, provost and Security Unit, PAF, Karachi. I am posted there since 1965. Group Cap. M.R. Qureshi was our provost Marshal, Pakistan Air Force in January, 1968. I was asked by the provost Marshal to interrogate Air Force personnel suspected to have taken part in the Agartola Conspiracy Separatist Movement. I gathered some information through some informer and I interrogated Sgt. Jalil, Flt. Sgt. Mufizullah, S.A.C. Mahfuzul Bari, Sgt. Zahurul Huq and Sgt. Shamsul Huq. After interrogation Sgt. Jalil led us to his house where I was accompanied by Flt. Lt. Kirmani, Sgt. Gulshan and Flt. Sgt. Ali for the house search in connection with the recovery of a hand grenade. When we reached
Member named Zahid Bashir Ansari. Then Sgt. Jalil took us inside his house and opened an Almirah took out a dummy hand grenade from inside and handed it over to me in the presence of all these persons. I made a recovery memo on the spot in the presence of witnesses. This is that recovery memo which I prepared at that time now marked Ext. P.W. 183/1. This recovery memo bears my signature which was also signed by the witnesses present there. This dummy hand grenade already marked Ext. P. W. 4/1 appears to be similar to the hand grenade recovered by me at that time. After coming back to our unit I handed over this hand grenade to our provost Marshal along with the recovery memo.
Page: 346
I also interrogated Sgt. Zahurul Huq. After interrogating Zahrul Huq I went to Major stations of P.A.F. I visited Chaklala and then I visited Peshwar and interrogated S.A.C. Islam. Then I visited PAF station Kohat and interrogated Corporal Farid. Then I visited PAF station Resalpur and checked certain records. Then I came to sargodah. There also I checked
Creek and interrogated him. I did not record any statement nor did I submit any report.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The next rank above the rank of Warrant officer is Master Warrant Officer. That is also not commissioned rank. Sgt. Jalil was taken in custody by the provost Marshal of No. 2, Provost and Security Unit. He was taken in to custody a day before this recovery was made so far as my knowledge goes. Jalil was kept after his arrest in a room in our unit. This recovery and search was on a Sunday. I do not know the time when Jalil was actually arrested as I was not personally present. It is not correct to say that I arrested Jalil from his quarter. I never went to the house of Jalil before making the recovery of the hand grenade. Our unit is located on Ingle Road. I interrogated Jalil on Sunday morning there. I used to live in Kalapool near Baval PNS Shafa. This is about one and a half miles away from our unit. I was asked to interrogate all PAF suspected persons about ten days before making the recovery. The order was not given to me in writing. I kept no record as to what I did after I received this order from the Provost Marshal. I maintained no recorded whatever of framed the charge and submitted the some to our Commanding Officer. I also mentioned the section under which he was charged but the section I do not remember now. The charged has to be in writing. As far as I know, a written charge is never given to the accused in the PAF. The accused Sgt. Jalil was never produced before the Commanding Officer. It is out rule, however, that an accused has to be produced before the Commanding Officer within 48 hours. But in this case, as far as I know, he was transferred from Karachi to Dacca within 48 hours and as such he could
Page: 347
not be produced before the Commanding Officer. I do not know whether it is a fact that Sgt. Jalil was arrested on the 3rd February, 1968 and was sent to Dacca on the 7th February, 1968. I came along with Sgt, Jalil to Dacca but I cannot remember whether it was on the 7th February or not. I stayed in Dacca for three to four weeks. I was directed by the Provost Marshal wing Com. Qureshi to accompany Sgt. Jalil to Dacca.
During this period of 3/4 weeks leave while staying in Dacca I did not do anything in connection with this case. I went back to Karachi after this period of 3/4 weeks and came back again to Dacca after a month. I was examined by the Police on the 20th May, 1968. Excepting the signature of the search witnesses, the all other writings of this Ext. P.W.183/1 is in my hand. I do not know any corporal Ibrahim who may have been involved in a spy case and died subsequently. I heard about his case, it is not correct to say that I had intimidated Corporal Jalil by saying that he will meet the same fate as that of corporal Ibrahim. There is no particular cell in our Unit where suspects are interrogated. The persons are interrogated in the Interrogation Officer in our Unit. It is not correct to say that I also intimidated him by saying that his entire family will be arrested. Along with sergeant Jalil, Sergeant Mafizullah, Shamsul Huq and SAC Bari were also detained there. The white painting on these hand-grenades indicates that it is a dummy. This does not exist in all hand-grenades. The filler cap No is TAS-45. Dummy hand grenades are also entered in records and cannot be removed by anybody form the store except by stealing.
These dummy hand grenades are stored in a proper room and not kept on the open. When A dummy hand-grenade is written off by a specialist team than it is forwarded for disposal to a depot for further steps. This hand-grenade might have been a light hand-grenade at one time. It is now drilled and has become a dummy. I do not know whether a dummy hand grenade likes this in his drawing room he is likely to be charged for being in improper possession. I did not see the recovered hand-grenade after the recovery until today. There is a sitting room in the house of sergeant Jalil. There are quarters adjacent on both sides to the quarter of sergeant Jalil. None of the two persons residing in these
Page: 348
quarters was present at the time of the search. Sunday is a holiday but I was requested by sergeant Jalil not to call neighbours in connection with the search. I cannot say whether there were any persons inside the neighbouring quarters at that time. Sergeant Jalil was not tortured in the interrogation room while he was interrogated.
I did not know Sgt. Jalil from before. One Junior Technician Zulfiquar was known to me. He was an acquaintance and not a friend. I did not got to see him in the Hospital while he was there. I have done the Instructional Technical Course at Kohat. The duration of that course is 28 working days. It is not correct to say that the trainees had to reach there for the training at least 3 days before it started. I was stationed at Kohat and I reported for the training on the same day it started. I cannot say whether the training generally starts on Monday. I was never posted in Dacca. I was not posted in Dacca but I was attached on duty during the 3/4 weeks I have already mentioned. In that way, I came 3 times to Dacca.
TO MR. MD. ISMAIL
I did not put any signature of mine on the hand-grenade that I recovered. Nor did I put any signature on a label on the hand-grenade. Nor did the witnesses put their signatures or initials on the hand-grenade.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN FOR FT. SGT. MAFIZULLAH
Ft. Sgt. Mafizullah was N.C.O. in charge of accounts of Drigh Road. It is not correct to say that he was tortured seriously at the Interrogation Centre.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 349
DEPOSITION OF P.W.184, FLIGHT LT. NAQEEM
KIRMANI ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Flt. Lt. Maqeem Kirmani, son of Enamullah Kirmani, aged 38 years. Clo Pakistan Air Force, Korangi Creek.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am posted now at PAF Station at Korangi Creek since 1966. I know Warrant Office Iqbal Osmani. On 4th February, 1968 I was detailed as the Orderly officer of the Day at PAF, Korangi Crick. On that day at 3 P.M., I went along with Warrant Officer Osmani to Sgt. Jalil’s house. He carried out a search in his quarter during the search a hand-grenade was discovered. Accused Sergeant Jalil himself led to a bed room where it was kept and took out the hand-grenade from the bottom shelf of an almirah. A recovery Memo was prepared at that time which I signed. I see my signature of Ext. P.W.183/1. The hand-grenade that was recovered at that time was similar to the one marked Ext. P.W.4/1.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
In the recovery memo also it is not mentioned as to where from the grenade was recovered. In the recovery memo, it is not mentioned that sergeant Jalil himself produced the hand-grenade. The recovery memo was prepared by the Warrant Officer Osmani in my presence. I read it and signed it.
Page: 351
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness) Admitted to be correct.
Chairman. Member Member
CORRECTION
27.11.1968.
P.W.184, Flt. Lt. Muqeem Kirmani has read over his statement to himself and he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 352
DEPOSITION OF P.W.185, JAHID BASHIR ANSARI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Zahid Bashir Ansari S/o. Bashir Ahmed Ansari aged 30 years, by faith Muslim. I reside at 1975, Cleyton Quarters. Karachi-5.
Tendered for cross-examination.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 353
DEPOSITION OF P.W.186, LT. COMMANDER A.B.
SAYEED ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A. B. Sayeed, S/o S.B. Abdullah, aged 42 years, by faith Muslim, Clo. Naval Head-quarters, Karachi.
I am Lt. Commander in the Pakistan Navy and am posted in the Naval Headquarters at Karachi since 18th August, 1967. I am the Assistant Drafting commander of the Pakistan Navy in the Naval Headquarters. The entries in these recorded shown to me are made on the authority and instruction issued by my office. This document shown to me is the service document of A.Z.M. Khurshid whose Official No. is 65364 and his status is Able seaman. (The document is now marked Ext. P.W.186/1. This document has some papers in its pocket.) This service book is of M. Rahman whose official number is 66508. His status is Steward. His full name inside the document is Mujibur Rahman. (This document is now marked) Ext. P.W.186/2 which has some documents in its pocket.) This service book is of Sultanuddin Ahmed whose Official number is 64038. His status is Leading Seaman. (This is marked Ext. P.W. 186/3. This document has also some papers in its pocket.) This is the service book of Nur Mohammad whose Official number is 64672 and whose status is Leading Seaman. (This book is marked Ext. P.W.186/4. This has also some papers in its pocket.) This service book already marked DG/1, is that of Golam Ahmed whose official number is 66776. His status is Able Seaman. (This has also some papers in its pocket.) These are the official record kept in the official course of business.
Page: 355
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
27.11.1968. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the defence: As before. Accused Present: As before Witness of oath: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.186, LT. COMMANDER A.B. SAYEED CONTINUED CROSS- EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I was at one time posted at Chittagong from May, 1964 to August, 1967. At Chittagong, there is a Naval Base and a Shore Establishment. Training to boys is given only in Karachi. The ratings at Chittagong are provided with quarters. Those who are unmarried and those who do not have their families with them live within the establishment. The working hours of the Stewards differ depending on the strength of the establishment. I cannot recollect what practice prevailed in this respect at
Page: 357
Chittagong in 1966-67. Normally the practice would be that the Stewards may be on duty for 24 hours at a stretch and for the next 24 hours may be off duty. If a special duty rating after finishing his duty hours wants to go out he falls in at a particular place in the establishment, enters his name is the book after inspection and then leaves. It is not however, correct that they are not permitted to leave before 10 or 11 a.m. in the morning. It depends on circumstances. It would be the commanding officer who would permit a rating to go out. Normally a Quarter Master rating would work for four hours and then be off for 8 hours but it depends on circumstances. Normally they may go out only after three days following this routine. If a rating does not come back according to the routine time fixed, the fact may be noted and he may be called to account for it. It would be considered as breach of discipline. Emergency period due to war is still on in the Armed Forces. It is not correct that the emergency was lifted from the 9th February, 1968. At least I am not aware every leave and movement of person concerned would be noted in his service book if it is correctly maintained. If an incorrect entry has been made in the service book about the movement of particular personnel and discovered later on that would be corrected. According to the service book before me here, Steward Mujibur Rahman was in P.N.S. Himalaya, Karachi in September, 1965. According to this book he reported to P.N.S. BAKHTIAR at Chittagong on 6th November, 1965. The service book of Sultanuddin Ahmed shows that he was in P.N.S. Himalaya, Karachi in September, 1965. He remained in Karachi till he was discharged from service with effect from 4th September, 1967.
to P.N.S. BAKHTIAR, Chittagong on 1st April, 1966 and was there up to 234 May, 1966. This is the period when he is supposed to have come to East Pakistan on leave.
Steward Mujibur Rahman as his service book shows on leave in East Pakistan and was shown as part of P.N.S. BAKHTIAR from 27.2.1965 to 21.9.1966. This rating was actually in P.N.S. BAKHTAIR from 6th
Page: 358
November, 1965. All his leave was taken while he was attached to that ship. Before this date, he was in P.N.S. Himalaya in West Pakistan. This book shows that he went on leave from 15.4.66 to 13.5.66..
The service book of A.B. Khurshid shows that from 28.4.63 he was attached to boat M.L. 3519 in East Pakistan and on 18.9.66 he went to West Pakistan. The leave account shows that this rating went on leave from P.N.S. BAKHTIAR from 6.6.1966. But the date of the expiry of the leave has not been mentioned. This is the only leave recorder in 1966. The leave as is mentioned in this book was granted for 60 days. The position is that if a rating happened to be on leave in East Pakistan although he was born on the establishment of West Pakistan, at the time of war with India declared in September, 1965, he would be required to join a ship in East Pakistan and he would then be required to join P.N.S. BAKHTIAR, Chittagong.
I know Lt. Commander M. Sayeed of Navy. He was a Commanding Officer of a Gunboat in Chittagong. I have been to Cox’s Bazar and stayed in a hotel there. I am afraid I am not familiar with his signature. One has to make entry in the register when one stays in a motel in Cox’s Bazar giving the date of arrival and departure. Commodore U.A. Sayeed was Naval Secretary of the Pakistan Navy Probably in 1966. I did not frequently get letters from him and therefore I am not familiar with his signature. I also know Lt. Com. Nasrat Iqbal Beg. I worked with him at Chittagong. (The witness was handed over Naval Pay and Identity Book of Lt. M. Hossain and asked to say whether it has an entry signed by that Officer.) The witness says I am unable to recognise his signature’. Not all Officers of the Navy are provided with telephones, at their residence.
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
I know Lt. Rouf of the Navy. May be he was attached to P.N.S ‘BAKHTIAR’ between May, 1964 and March, 1965. I was an executive officer in PNS ‘BAKHTIAR’ at that time. He was transferred as Recruiting Officer to Dacca but I cannot say when. He was a Recruiting Officer, East Pakistan. I do not remember any incident of ordering an investigation into recruitment made by this officer of certain cadets, nor
Pagee: 359
do I remember that I ever told him that he recruited goondas. All Naval Establishments start working hours from 8 A.M. The ratings are to report five minutes earlier if they are to hoist the Flag. Normally an officer would not be required to substantiate the grounds on which he asks for leave in his application in the Navy.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
CORRECTION
28.11.1968.
P.W.186, Lt. Commander A.B. Saeed has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
On page 1091, in the 2nd line, the words ‘Shore establishment should be deleted.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 360
DEPOSITION OF P.W.187, LT. COM. SYED FAZAL RAB
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Syed Fazal Rab, son of Syed Moazzur Rab, aged 35 years, Lt. Commander, Navy, Stationed at Naval Headquarters, Karachi.
I am at present Staff Officer, Naval Headquarters Karachi. I am serving in the Naval Secretariat Branch. The four history cards of the officers shown to me are maintained by myself. They relate to the officers Moazammel Hossain, Abdur Rouf, Molla Matiour Rahman and Moazzem Hossain (They are now marked Ext. P.W. 187/1 to 187/4). These are maintained in the regular course of official business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KAHN
Commodore U. A. Sayeed was at one time Naval Secretary. I am familiar with his signature. On the documents handed over to me, I see his signature. (The document is now marked Ext. DU/1). The letter below it and now marked Ext. DU/2 is also signed by him. The books which I have proved today are known as Master Service Books. The distance between PNS ‘HIMALAYA’ and PNS KARSAZ’ by road would be about 14 miles PNS ‘HIMALAYA’ is on Monora Island. Between Monora and the main land, there is a crossing by boat of about 2 miles. A ship with fixed moorings is one which has not been taken to a jetty or dock and is filed up between a pair of buoys to prevent swimming.
There are boats ear-marked for crossing between Monora and Karachi every day. Normally such boats are only used for such crossing
Page: 362
but the Officer Commanding PNS Himalaya may give order for taking such a boat to a ship in fixed moorings after diverting the route. I have served with Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain in PNS Alamgir. I was for a short period in Chittagong in 1962. During that period the C-in-C visited Chittagong and then visited Chalna. He came by Air and boarded the ship Alamgir at Chittagong. Mr. M.S. Zubeir, Secretary, Communications and Commodore Rashid Ahmed and Lt. Gen. M. Syed accompanied him. Commodore Yusuf, Naval Secretary was also with him. As far as I know, the working hours for training establishments are 7-30 a.m. to 2 p.m. or 2-30 p.m. but they are likely to be changed to any time. Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain was also serving in PNS Alamgir when the C-in-C came to Chittagong.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member.
CORRECTION
28.11.1968.
P.W.197, Sayed Fazal Rab has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
At page 1097 in the second line of my statement, the word ‘Secretariat’ should be replaced by the word ‘Secretary. At page 1099 in the 10th line the words “Lt. Genl. M. Syed’ should be replaced by ‘Commander Sayeed’. Also, it is mentioned in the next sentence that commander Yusuf, Naval Secretary went with him. This should be corrected as Commander Syeed was the Naval Secretary.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 363
DEPOSITION OF P.W.188, SQUADRON LEADER MOKHLESUR RAHMAN ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Sqn. Leader Mokhlesur Rahman, son of late Tamijuddin Ahmed, aged 40 years, now posted at PAF Record officer, Mouripur as Sąn. Leader
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am in-charge of the Airmen’s Documents in the Record Office, PAF, Mouripur, Karachi. I see here the personal file of Corporal Md. Amir Hossain which comes from our office marked Ext. P.W. 188/1. It is maintained in the regular course of official business. He has retired from the service. I see here also the personal file of Corp. Serajul Islam maintained by our office which is now marked as Ext. P.W.188/2. I see here also the service record of Sgt. Shamsuddin consisting of 5 books now marked as Ext. P.W.188/3. I also see the service books now Sgt. Abdul Halim which is now marked as Ext. P.W.188/4. I see here also the service record of Acting Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah which is now marked as Ext. P.W.188/5. I also see here the service record of ex-corporal M.A. Samad now marked as Ext. P.W. 188/6. I also see here the service record of Flt. Sgt. Md. Fazlul Huq which is now marked as Ext. P.W.188/7. This is the service record of Md. Abdur Razzaque now marked as Ext. P.W.188/8. This is the service record of Sgt. A.K.M. Zahurul Huq since discharged. (it is now marked as Ext. P.W.188/9.) This is the service record of SAC Mafuzul Bari which is now marked as Ext. P.W.188/10. I see here the service record of LAC Md. Shamsul Huq now marked as
Page: 365
Ext. P.W.188/11. This is the service record of Acting Flt. Sgt. Md. Abdul Jalil now marked as Ext. P.W.188/12. These are all records duly maintained in the official course of business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
It was on 5.12.61 according to the service record the Samad was discharged from service. I do not see any entry in the service record showing that he was recalled to service in 1965. There is, however, a paper in the file to show that he was recalled to service. I find another document that shows that he was recalled to service on the 6th of September, 1965. There is another document showing that the Recruiting Officer, Dacca, had found him fit for re-employment. He was posted to Badin with effect from 25.11.65. Badin may be about 50/60 miles away from Karachi. I have not been there.
I do not find any paper with regard to his taking leave in December, 1965. It is the custom that when Airman up to the rank of corporal goes out, he has to book out and book in when he comes back. He has to enter the time in the register in the Guard room. A guest coming to see personnel has also to enter his name in the Guard room register. This applies to all P.A.F. establishment including Sgt.’s Mess, when an Airman is to go to Kohat from Dacca for training and also to come back from Kohat, he is given a movement order and he has to buy his own ticket. He can get advance T.A. as well as advance booking form. This is the form in which certain rebate is allowed to an Airman. The movement orders specify the date of joining a training centre but not the date of return. On the completion of the course there will be another movement order given by that unit under whom the training is given. An Airman coming back from Kohat, if he wants to deviate from his normal route and visit other places like Karachi, has to obtain permission from the unit. After completion of the training, movement order will specify as to which date he has to report back to Dacca. A concession voucher for railway travel is available when a person is going on leave at his own expense.
Page: 366
I do not see any entry in the service book of Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah showing that he obtained leave in January, 65. (The witness was shown another page in the service record and he now says-yes, the book does show that he obtained leave from 5.1.1965 to 7.2.65. The service book of Sgt. Shamsuddin shows that he did not take any leave in October, 1967. He was on casual leave from 8.12.67 to 9.12.67. He was also on leave from 2.7.67 to 5.8.67. I have no idea as to how the guests are shown in the Mess register in the Sgt.’S mess. Even if the guest is an Airman he has to enter his name and time in the Guard room register.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
This is the service book of Corporal Jamaluddin now marked Ext. P.W. 188/13.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The Record Office of P.A.F. Mauripur is out of bounds to all persons including the people of other sections of the P.A.F. The persons of other sections in the record office are allowed to go to other sections as well of the same record office. Posting Documents, Carriers, Planning and promotion are part of the same Record Office.
No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 367
CORRECTION
28.11.1968.
P.W.188, San. Leader Mokhlesur Rahman has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 368
DEPOSITION OF P.W.189, SYED HASAN RAZA ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Syed Hasan Raza, son of Syed Ali Reza, aged 40 years, by faith Muslim, Air Headquarters Peshawar as a squadron leader.
I am the Assistant Air Secretary in the Air Headquarters at Peshawar, This is the personal file of Ext-Flt. Lt. M. M. Rameez now marked Ext. P.W.189/1. This is an official record maintained in our office in due course of official business.
CROSS- EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
Badin is located about 80 miles away from Karachi.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 370
CORRECTION
28.11.1968.
P.W.189, Syeed Hasan Raza read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
In the last line of examination, it should be added ’80’ miles from Karachi by Air’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 371
DEPOSTION OF P.W. 190, MAJOR MD. NAWAZ ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Nawaz, son of Md. Ishaque, aged 42 years, by faith Muslim, Senior Record Office, East Regiment, Chittagong.
I am posted as Senior Record Officer in the East Bengal Regiment, Chittagong since 29th April, 1968. This is the Sheet-Roll of Ex-Sub. Tajul Islam now marked Ext. P.W.190/1. This is the Sheet-Roll of Ext. Sub. Abdur Razzak now marked Ext. P.W.190/2. This is the Sheet-Roll of Havildar Azizul Huq now marked Ext. P.W.190/3. Those are official records maintained in the usual course of official business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. NURUL ALAM
There is only one Officers’ Mess known as EBRC Mess in Chittagong. Normally bachelor officers stay there but sometimes married officers may also stay. Bachelor Officers cannot stay outside the Officer’s Mess unless specially permitted to do so by the Station Commander or the competent authority.
TO MR. ABDUL MALEK
Tamgah-i-Juart is a gallantry award probably third of fourth in the order of precedence. I am not sure but some monetary award is also attached to this award.
(No other Counsel wished to cross-examine the witness).
Page: 373
Read over and admitted to be correct. Chairman. Member. Member.
CORRECTION
28.11.1968.
P.W.190, Major Md. Nawaz has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 374
DEPOSITION OF P.W.191, MAJOR M. AZAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is M. Azam, son of Md. Azam, aged 40 years, by faith Muslim. I am stationed at Nowshera as Senior Record Officer.
I am a Senior Record Officer in Nowshera. This is the Unit copy of the Sheet-Roll Pf, Havildar Dalil Uddin now marked Ext. P.W. 191/1. This is an official record and maintained in the usual course of official business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN:
In this Sheet-Roll the locations of the unit are not recorded but only the names of the unit are recorded.
(The witness was asked to send in writing from Nowshera the information regarding the location of the unit of Havildar Daliluddin in November- December, 1965 and January-February, 1966. To this the witness stated that he would send it in writing after making necessary enquiries to the Registrar of this Tribunal.)
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 376
CORRECTION
28.11.1968.
P.W.191, Major M.N. Azam has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 377
DEPOSITION OF P.W.192, MAJOR KHODA BAKSH
BHATTI ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Khoda Baksh Bhatti, son of Fateh Mohammad Bhatti, aged 49 years, by faith Muslim. I am now stationed at Abottabad as Senior Record Officer of Army Medical Corps. This is the Sheet-Roll of L. NK. A.N.M. Yusuf now marked Ext. P.W.192/1. This is maintained in our office in due course of official business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 379
DEPOSITION OF P.W.193, MAJOR SYED KARRAR
HOSSAIN ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Syed Karrar Hossain, son of Syed Jawad Hossain, aged 48 years, by faith Muslim, stationed at Malir Cantt. as Senior Record Officer, Army Ordnance Corps.
I am stationed as Senior Record Officer at Malir Cantt. Army Ordnance Corps. This is the Sheet – Roll of Clerk General Duty Mujibur Rahman now marked Ext. P.W.193/1. This is an official record maintained in our office in due course of official business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Read over and admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 381
CORRECTION
28.11.68.
P.W.193, Major Syed Karrar Hossain has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 382
DEPOSITION OF P.W.194, MAJOR AJZIB HOSSAIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Ajaib Hossain, son of Noor Alam khan, aged 40 years, by faith Muslim, officer In-charge, Central Officers Record Office, GHQ, Rawalpindi.
I am stationed as officer-in charge in the Central Officers Record Office, GHQ, Rawalpindi. This is the record of service of Major Shamsul Alam now marked Ext. P.W.194/1. This is the record of service of Capt. Khurshiduddin Ahmed marked Ext. P.W.194/2. This is the record of service of Capt. Md. Shawkat Ali Mia now marked Ext. P.W.194/3. This is the record of service of Capt. Khandakar Najmul Huda Ext. P.W. 194/4. This is the record of service of Capt. Md. Abdul Mutalib now marked Ext. P.W. 194/5. This is the record of service of Capt. Md. Abdul Alim Bhuiyan now marked Ext. P.W.194/6. This is the record of service of Major A.N.M. Nuruzzaman now marked Ext. P.W.194/7. All these records are official and maintained in our office in due course of official business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 194, MAJOR AZAIB HOSSAIN: TO MR. NURUL ALAM
The document Ext. DV/1 was apparently addressed to our office from 82-Supply Platoon, ASF, Chittagong. I cannot say whether this letter is genuine or not.
Page: 384
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The ISP Unit is located in Karachi. (No other Counsel wishes to cross examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
CORRECTION
28.11.68.
P.W.194, Major Ajaib Hossain has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
In the third line on page 1112 instead of “ASF” it should be “ASC” and in the last line of that page instead of “ISP” it should be “ISPR”.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 385
DEPOSITION OF P.W.195, SK.ABDUL MAJID ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Sk. Abdul Majid, son of Sk. Abdul Ghafur, aged 44 years, now posted at Nawshera as Senior Record Officer, Armed Corps.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am now posted at Nawshera as Senior Record Officer, Armoured Corps. This is the service record of Risaldar S.K.M. Shamsul Huq., now marked as Ext. P.W.195/1. This is an Official record maintained in due course of business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. M.A. MALEK
I know Tamghaha-e-Jurat is a gallantry award and carries some monetary award but I do not know the exact quantity of it. The record shows that Shamsul Huq was awarded Tamghaha-e-Jurat. He was attached to 20-Lancers. As far as I remember there are other Military officers & Jawans in 0- 20 – Lancers who received this award also.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 386
CORRECTION
28.11.68.
P.W.195, Major Sk. Abdul Majid has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
In the 3rd line of my statement, the initial ‘S’ should be replaced by ‘A’ before the word Shamsul Huq.
The rest of my statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 387
DEPOSITION OF P.W.169 (196), MD. JAN SIDDIQUE ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Mohammad Jan Siddique son of, Md. Osman, aged 46 years, now posted as Assistant Estate Officer, Estate Office, Karachi.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
Tendered for cross-examination:
CROSS- EXAMINATION Declined
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 388
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H. Pk., Chairman Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the defence: As before. Accused present: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.197, MD. AMIR ALI ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Amir Ali, son of Mvi. Khoda Baksh Mia, aged 30 years, of 45/1, Bama Charan Chakrabarty Road, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a Compounder of Bham & Co. Chemists, 7, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca, for the last 10 years. Whatever prescriptions are dispensed with from our dispensary, we copy them down in the register. I see here the register of Bham & Co. Now it is marked as Ext. P.W.197/1. This is maintained in the usual course of business. At serial No. 19276 in this registered dated 3.11.1965, there is a copy of prescription in this register headed Sk. Mujibur Rahman. This copy of prescription is now marked as Ext. P.W.197/2. This is in the hand of K.M. Paul Compounder who also worked in Bham & Co.
Page: 389
He left the service of this company about 2 years back. I am familiar with his hand-writing. Again at serial No. 20062 dated 16.11.1965 there is a copy of prescription in the register headed “Mr. Sk. Mujibur Rahman” and now marked as Ext P.W.197/3. This is in the hand of Bijon Chaudhury. He is no longer in the service of Bham and Co. I am familiar with his hand-writing. There is another entry at serial No. 20387 dated 20.11.1965 being a copy of prescription in the name of Mr. Sk. Mujibur Rahman in the hand writing of K.M. Paul an ex-compounder. (This is now marked as Ext. P.W.197/4). At serial No. 20664 dated 24.11.1965 there is another prescription copied out in the name of Sk. Mujibur Rahman. This is in the hand of Syed Mosharraf Hossain who is still in service of the Company as Compounder. I am familiar his handwriting. (This is now marked as Ext.P.W.197/5). At serial No. 21134 dated 1.12.1965 there is another prescription copied out in the register, in the name of Mr.Sk.Mujibur Rahman, in the hand of Mr.K.M. Paul, excompounder. (This is now marked as Ext. P.W.197/6). Under the prescriptions copied out the doctors, names are also mentioned who prescribed the medicines.
CROSS -EXAMINATION OF P.W. 197
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I cannot remember if other prescriptions besides those that are exhibited in Court to-day were dispensed from our dispensary or not. The address of the patient is not given in these copies.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 390
DEPOSITION OF P.W.198, MUKUL CHANDRA DUTTA
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Mukul Chandra Dutta, son of Rabindra Prasad Dutta, aged 24 years, village Amlapara, Jamalpur, Dist. Mymensingh.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I am a photographer and commercial artist. I have my establishment at 103, Motijheel, in front of the Police hospital. The Police seized the negative book from my shop. I see the book here already marked Ext. P.W.93/1.The police prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see the seizure list here Ext. P.W.94/1 which bears my signature. On 27.3.1967 at Serial No. LM-98 there is an entry in this negative register in the name of Mr. M. Rahman. (This is now marked as Ext. P.W.198/1). This entry is in my hand. Mr.M. Rahman had ordered a Photostat copy of a letter and this entry relates to that. This is the negative which I see here already marked as Ext. P.W.15/5 and which was prepared by me from that letter. Mr. Rahman himself took the negative from me on 28th March, 1967. I did not know Mr.M. Rahman nor I would be able to recognise him.
CROSS- EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I have an order took in my shop which I have not brought with me to-day. It is correct that in the order book I would note down the name of the person and what order he gave. I do not take the signature of the person who gives the order or his address in that order book. I did not note down in the book at the time of delivering the photostates as to what took the delivery nor I took his signature. In this book, there is nothing
Page: 391
written to show that it is a negative book. There is nothing written in this book by me to indicate that it concerns negatives. In fact, the book is meant for writing down orders of clients who went to get photographed. What I meant to say a moment ago about the other book was that the other book relates to an earlier period. I took down all orders in this book. The entry Ext. P.W.198/1 just says that a copy was ordered. It does not mention the word negative. Nor is there any mention of a letter given for being photographed in this entry. There is no mark or writing on the negative to show that it is from my studio.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 392
DEPOSITION OF P.W.199, A.K.M. BARKATULLAH ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A.K.M. Barkatullah, son of Md. Abed, aged 15 years, by faith Muslim, 1st year Student, T&T. College, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I live at 53, Purana Paltan. In my presence, the police seized a book from the ‘Arts and photographs’ shop in Motijheel. A seizure list was prepared which I signed. I see my signature in Ext P.W.94/1. The book marked Ext. P.W.93/1 was the book that was seized by the police on that occasion.
CROSS-EXAMINATION Declined.
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page:
393
DEPOSITION OF P.W.200, SHEIKH AMJAD ALI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Sheikh Amjad Ali son of Wazed Ali, aged 24 years, by faith Muslim, village Dighirpar Basar, PS. Munshigonj, District Dacca.
(As the witness does not know English, the oath was interpreted in Bengali to him by Mr.Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal who will also interpret his evidence).
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
Formerly I used to work at 4, Green Road, Dacca as a tailor. From 13, Green Square the police seized in my presence a negative, a bank paper, and an envelope. The police prepared a seizure list which I signed. I see my signature on the list already marked, Ext. P.W.1576 which was the one prepared on that occasion. The bank paper already marked Ext. P.W.15/7 was seized then. Whatever was seized was entered in the seizure list. The negative marked Ext. P.W.1575 was also taken on that occasion by the police.
CROSS -EXAMINATION
TO MR.ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The tailoring shop did not belong to me. I only worked there. One Md. Lokman was the owner of that tailoring shop. I had no discussion with Md. Lokman before coming for evidence to this Court. I do not know if Md. Lokman has already appeared as a witness in this Court. The paper which is kept within the camera is called negative. The
Page: 394
negative has no particular mark by which I can identify it. I saw it on that occasion and so I identified it. I saw the negative on the table when I reached there. The other papers seized were also on the table at that time.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct. Chairman. Member. Member
CORRECTION
2.12.1968.
P.W.200. Sheikh Amjad Ali has been explained to his at the statement in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal. He now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 395
DEPOSITION OF P. W.201, JAMALUDDIN AHMED ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Jamaluddin Ahmed, son of late Tojammel Ali aged 50 years, by faith Muslim, residing at Enayet Bazar, Chittagong.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a compounder of Dr. Syedur Rahman at Chittagong. I am familiar with the hand writing of Dr. Syedur Rahman. I have worked with him for about 9 years. The prescriptions shown to me already marked P.W.148/33, P.W.148/34, P.W.148/35, P.W.148/36, P.W.148/37, P.W.148/38, P.W.148/39, P.W.148/40, P.W.148/41 and P.W.148/42, are in the handwriting of Dr. Saeedur Rahman.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The letter is shown to me has been written by Dr. Syeedur Rahman. (It is already marked Ext. P.W.148/45). I did not know Major Hasan who is mentioned in this letter now have I seen him at Chittagong. I had come to Dacca to meet Dr. Syeedur Rahman only once, again said – I did not do so. It is correct to say that I had met Dr. Syeedur Rahman in Chittagong in his house the day before yesterday. I was present at Chittagong when Dr. Syeedur Rahman was arrested at his house. There was no military officer present there at that time. It was the O/C., Kotwali P.S. who arrested him. He was in uniform. The day he was arrested, he was
Page: 396
brought to Dacca. I was present when a cow was sacrificed at the ‘Mazar’ next to the house of Dr. Syeedur Rahman more than 5 months from now. (No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member.
CORRECTION
2.12.1968
P.W.201, Mr. Jamaluddin Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 397
DEPOSITION OF P.W.202, MR. ALI AHMED DEWAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Ali Ahmed Dewan, son of Fazlur Rahman Dewan, aged 33 years, by faith Muslim, now residing at 30, Nabendra Nath Basak Lane, Dacca.
I am now Upper Division Clerk-cum-Cashier in the Economic Affairs Division in the Central Secretariat, Dacca. Previously I was in the Regional Central Statistical Office, Dacca as a Lower Division Clerk. In my presence, the police took a ‘note sheet’ from that office. I see my signature on the seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.162/1. The paper shown to me Ext. P.W.3/59 is the document that was taken on that occasion by the police. I know Amir Hossain Mia who worked in the Central Statistical Office, Dacca. I am familiar with his hand writing. The writing on this document marked within red pencil and now marked Ext. P.W.202/1 is in the handwriting of Amir Hossain Mia. I see the document already marked Ext. P.W.3/58. I can recognise on it the signature of Amir Hossain Mia but I cannot say whether the writing on this besides that signature is of Amir Hossain Mia or not.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I have passed the I. A. Examination in 1966. I have joined service after passing the Matriculation Examination in 1957, in the C. S. Office, Karachi and came over to Dacca in September, 1958. It was on the 12th of October, 1968 that I joined my present office. I cannot remember the time when the Police seized the document Ext. P.W.3/58. The S. B.
Page: 398
Office people used to visit our office very 3rd or 4th day. I am talking about the time after the arrest or Mr. Amir Hossain. They used to contact our officers in the office. This continued till the start of this case which started about a year ago. The latter produced now is in the hand-writing of Mr. Amir Hossain. (It is now marked as Ext. DW/1.)
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 399
DEPOSITION OF P.W.203, ZAHURUL HUQ ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Zahurul Huq, son of late Abdul Kader, aged 35 years, P.O. & Village Dhania, Dist. Comilla.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am the Personal Assistant to the Director, NIPA, Dacca. Mr. Ali Reza was serving in the NIPA in 1962-63 and I know him in that connection. He was a research Associate then I was a stenographer at that time. I am not familiar with the hand-writing of Ali Reza. The police seized some papers from our office in my presence and prepared a seizure list and I signed that seizure list. This is the seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.162/2 and I see my signature on it. The documents that were seized were entered in the seizure list. They are Exts. P.W.162/3, P.W.162/4 and P.W.162/5. I can recognise the signature of Ali Reza. The documents Ext. P.W.162/5 bears the signature of Ali Reza. The witness now says that he recognises it. I recognise the signature but I cannot say surely as to whose writing is above it. The signature on Ext.P.W.162/4 is also of Ali Reza. I recognise the signature but I am not familiar with his other writing. This is also the signature of Ali Reza which appears on Ext. P.W.162/3.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 203
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
I never saw Mr. Ali Reza signing in my presence. I saw his signatures on some typed papers in the office. I recognise the signature
Page: 400
DEPOSITION OF P.W.203, ZAHURUL HUQ ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Zahurul Huq, son of late Abdul Kader, aged 35 years, P.O. & Village Dhania, Dist. Comilla.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am the Personal Assistant to the Director, NIPA, Dacca. Mr. Ali Reza was serving in the NIPA in 1962-63 and I know him in that connection. He was a research Associate then I was a stenographer at that time. I am not familiar with the hand-writing of Ali Reza. The police seized some papers from our office in my presence and prepared a seizure list and I signed that seizure list. This is the seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.162/2 and I see my signature on it. The documents that were seized were entered in the seizure list. They are Exts. P.W.162/3, P.W.162/4 and P.W.162/5. I can recognise the signature of Ali Reza. The documents Ext. P.W.162/5 bears the signature of Ali Reza. The witness now says that he recognises it. I recognise the signature but I cannot say surely as to whose writing is above it. The signature on Ext.P.W.162/4 is also of Ali Reza. I recognise the signature but I am not familiar with his other writing. This is also the signature of Ali Reza which appears on Ext. P.W.162/3.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 203 TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
I never saw Mr. Ali Reza signing in my presence. I saw his signatures on some typed papers in the office. I recognise the signature
Page: 400
as it is Written M.A. Reza and also because I saw his signature in the NIPA on some typed papers and at that time I saw his signature as M.A. Reza. I was in a separate section from that of Ali Reza. I had no occasion to have any paper signed by him.
TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
The witness was shown a paper with a writing as M. A. Reza and was asked whether this is the signature of Ali Reza and the witness says that it is not the signature of Ali Reza. (The paper is marked as Ext. DW/2.)
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 401
Mr. T. H. Khan, learned Counsel for the prosecution, states at this stage or basis of written instruction received by him that approver Lt. Mozammal Hossain has been transferred to the Custody of the P. N. Headquarters, Karachi. Dr. Saidur Rahman and Mr. M. M. Rameez have been sent me the Military officers, under Military escort, to see his ailing wife and son, respectively. They will be reporting back to Dacca on the 29th of this month by the second flight from Chittagong. About Mr. Amir Hossain, the learned Counsel states that he has not received any information as yet.
The learned Counsels for the defence also wish to know whether the other approvers have been sent away any where or whether they are still here in custody. This information will also be furnished tomorrow.
Mr. T. H. Khan, the learned Counsel of the prosecution, states that there is no other witness available to be examined for today and the Court is therefore, adjourned for the day.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 402
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
29.11.1968 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr, Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member. For the Prosecution: As before. For the defence: As before Accused present: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.204, MD. SIDDIQUR RAHMAN ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
TO MR.T. H. KHAN
My name is Md. Siddiqur Rahman, son of late Moulvi Sultan Mia, aged 34 years, by faith Muslim, Director of Labour, Government of East Pakistan, Dacca.
Since July, 1968 I am holding the post of Director, Labour, Government of East Pakistan. From August, 1966 till July, 1967 I was Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur. I went on one month’s leave in the beginning of 1967. From the end of February 1968 until the end of May. 1968 I was out of the country. I know Mr. K.M.S. Rahman, C.S.P. I never served under him or with him in any district. From the middle of 1964 to the middle 1966, I was a Deputy Commissioner, Chittagong Hill Tracts.
Page: 403
As far as I can remember in March or April, 1967 some person whose name I forget came to see me when I was Deputy Commissioner Faridpur with a letter which he told me, had been given to him by Mr. Shamsur Rahman. That person delivered the letter to me in my office. I cannot remember now what was dealt with in the letter. The letter, as far as I remember requested that I would help the person if possible, in what connection, it was not stated in the letter. I do not remember exactly whether he was accompanied by anybody. But as far as I can recollect he was alone. I cannot exactly remember now what that man had orally told me. But as far as I can recollect he mentioned some domestic problems and also some problems about his leave. As far as I remember he told me that he was military personnel. The police had questioned me about this letter and I tried to trace out the same but was unable to find it from my place.
(Note: At this stage, the learned counsels for the defence object to the prosecution counsel’s showing the photostat copy of the alleged letter to the witness. The learned counsels have drawn out attention to section 159 of the Evidence Act. As the original is not available we permit the learned counsel for the prosecution to put the photostat copy to the witness and to question him as to whether he can recollect the contents of the letter and whether he can say that this is the photostat of the writing of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman. The objection is also taken that it is not proved that this is the photostat copy of the original letter).
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
It is difficult for me to say whether this photostat copy contains the facsimile of the writing of Mr. Shamsur Rahman. The contents of this photostat copy, however, may be the same those of the letter which I received. I am not familiar with the signature of Mr. K.M.S. Rahman, the name of my wife is Khaleda.
(The photostat copy of the letter is marked for identification Ext. P.W. 204/1). The name of my wife is mentioned in the photostat copy of the letter.
Page: 404
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I had a personal Assistant while I was Deputy Commissioner, Faridpur. The official correspondence which used to come to me was dealt with by the whole office staff while the person of correspondence coming to me was dealt with by myself. I had my office separate from my residence. Section of confidential office was also located in my residence. I do not remember if I asked my P.A, at Faridpur to trace out this letter.
TO MR. ABDUS MOMEN
I see the letter now marked Ext. DV/I. The signature below it appears to be that of Mujibul Haq, who was Secretary of the C.S.P. Association. I have seen his signature before. As far as I remember I did attend the dinner of the C.S.P. Association at Hotel Shahbagh held on 12th March, 1966 as this letter mentions. I do not remember whether the invitation card is shown to me and now marked Ext. DV/2 was the one issued on that occasion. It is correct that the President was the chief guest at that dinner.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 405
CORRECTION
2.12.1968.
P.W.204, Md. Siddiqur Rahman was read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
At page 1130 in the 1st line of the 2nd paragraph, the figure ‘1967’ should be inserted instead of figure ‘1968’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 406
Mr. T. H. Khan has given us the list of witnesses who remain to be examined and these who will not be examined. He was also clarified that in certain cases, names of witnesses have been unnecessarily repeated in the lists. He has also put in a list of additional documents and a supplementary list of witnesses to be examined.
He further states with regard to the approvers on written instructions that seven approvers besides the three about whom he made a statement yesterday are in military custody at Dacca and they can be produced if and when desired by the court.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 407
DEPOSITION OF P.W.205 G.M. QADRI ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is G. M. Qadri son of late Mvi. Abdul Ghani, aged 52 years by faith Muslim, Additional Commissioner, Dacca.
TO Mr. T. H. KHAN
I am an Additional Deputy Commissioner from 16th November, 1967. I am also a Magistrate of the 1st Class. I recorded the statements of certain persons in this case.
On the 13th February, 1968 I recorded the confessional statement of Mr. Mirza Mohammad Rameez who was produced before me by a representative of the Special Branch of the Police, at 9.30 a.m. in V.I.P. quarter, Dacca Cantonment. That room is on the premises of this Signals Mess. I had been asked to record the confessions of persons in accordance with the letter issued by the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca. I questioned Mr. Rameez as to how long he had been in the custody of the arresting authority and where he had been kept. I recorded his answer. I told him that I was not a police officer but a Magistrate and that he was not bound to make a confession and that if he did make a confession, it may be used as evidence against him and that he should not say anything because others had told him to say so but that he was at liberty to say whatever he desired to say and that he should not say anything which is not true. I allowed him three hours’ time to reflect on the situation. He was seated in the same room in which I was before I recorded his statement. After the expiry of the three hours period I repeated the same warning which I have mentioned above. I then put a
Page: 408
few questions to satisfy myself that he would make a voluntary statement. I recorded the answers in the document marked Ext. P.W.205/1. After I was satisfied that he would make a voluntary statement I recorded his statement correctly. I read over the statement to him and gave the same to him to read it to himself and he signed it on every page. I then appended below my certificate as required by law under the confession.
On the 14h of February, 1968 at 9 a.m. a representative of the S.B. Police produced before me Md. Amir Hossain Mia at the V.I.P. Quarters, Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment, Dacca. I followed the same procedure and asked him some questions as I have mentioned in the case of Rameez and after giving him 3 hour’s time to reflect I put certain questions to satisfy myself that he would make a voluntary statement. After being so satisfied I recorded correctly whatever he stated before me. I read over to him the statement and he admitted it to be corrected and signed it. Then I appended below my formal certificate as required by law. (These papers are now marked as Ext. P.W.205/2).
On the 15th of February, 1968 at 10 p.m. Dr. Saidur Rahman was produced before me in the V.I.P. quarters, Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment, by S. B. Police. I followed the same procedure in this case as I have mentioned in putting the question to him to ensure that he would make a voluntary statement and gave him 3 hour’s time to reflect. After being satisfied I recorded correctly whatever he stated before me. On completion, it was read over to him and he admitted it to be corrected and signed it and I appended my certificate as required by law. (The record of questions and answers and the statement is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/3.)
On the 15th of February, 1968 at 2-30 p.m. Md. Abdul Alim Bhuyiah was produced before me by a representative of S.B. police in the VIP Quarters in the Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment. I gave him a similar question to him and gave him 3 hours’ time to reflect. I then put certain questions to him to ensure that he would make a voluntary statement and one being satisfied I recorded whatever he stated before me correctly. It was read over to him on completion. He signed it after admitting it to be
Page: 409
correct and I appended a certificate as required by Law. (This document is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/4.
On the 15th of February, 1968 at 2-30 p.m. Serajul Islam was produced before me by a representative of S.B. Police in the VIP quarters in the Signals Mess, Cantonment Dacca. I went through the same questions and procedure as mentioned above and gave him 3 hours’ time to reflect and then I put certain questions to ascertain whether he would make a voluntary statement. After being satisfied I recorded correctly whatever he stated. It was read over to him on completion and he admitted it to be correct and signed it and I appended a certificate as required by law. This document is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/5.
On the 17th of February, 1968 at 8-30 A. M. Mr. Mozammel Hossain was produced before me at the same place in the VIP quarters, signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment by the S.B. police. I went through the same procedure and asked him similar questions and give him 3 hour’s time to reflect. On completion of the period, I put certain questions to ascertain whether he would make a voluntary statement. Being thus satisfied I recorded his statement correctly. It was read over to him and he admitted it to be corrected and signed it. I gave my certificate as it was required by law. (This paper is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/6.)
On the 17th of February, 1968 at 12-30 P.M. Shamsuddin Ahmed was produced before me by the S.B. Police in the VIP Quarters in the Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment. I asked him similar questions and then I went through the same procedure and gave him 3 hour’s time to reflect and put certain questions to him to ascertain whether he would make a voluntary statement and being thus satisfied whatever he stated I correctly recorded. It was read over to him on completion and he admitted it to be corrected and signed it. Below it I gave my certificate as required by law. (This paper is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/7.)
On the 12th February, 1968 at 9 A.M. one Bhupati Bhushan Choudhury, Alias Manik Choudhury was produced before me by the S.B. Police at the VIP Quarters, Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment. I went through the same procedure and asked him similar questions as I have mentioned above and gave him 3 hour’s time to reflect and after that I put
Page: 410
some questions to ascertain whether he would make a voluntary statement. Being thus satisfied I recorded correctly whatever he stated before me. On completion, it was read over to him and he admitted it to be corrected and signed it. I then appended my certificate below as required by law. (This paper is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/8).
On the 4ch of March, 1968, at 12 noon, Md. Shawkat Ali Mia was produced before me by the S.B. Police at the VIP quarters, Signals Mess in Dacca Cantonment. I gave him the same warning and put similar questions as I have mentioned above and gave him 3 hour’s time to reflect. After that, I put certain questions to him to ascertain whether he would make a voluntary statement and thus being satisfied I recorded correctly whatever he stated to me. It was read over to him on completion and he admitted to it be corrected and signed it. I there after appended my signature and certificate as required by law. (This paper is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/9.)
I also recorded statements of some witnesses on the 1st of March, 1968 at 9 A.M. Anwar Hossain was produced before me by the S.B. Police in the VIP Quarters, Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment. I administered the oath to this witness and recorded correctly whatever he stated before me. After completion, it was read over to him and he admitted its correctness and signed it. Thereafter, I appended my certificate as required by law. (This document is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/10.)
On the 27th of March, 1968 at 12 noon, Kazi Ghiasuddin Ahmed was produced before me by a representative of S.B. Police in the VIP Quarters in Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment. I administered him the oath and there after recorded correctly whatever he stated before me. I read it over to him on completion and he admitted it to be corrected and signed it and I appended my certificate as required by law. (These papers are now marked as Ext. P. W. 205/11.)
On the 6th of March, 1968 at 10-30 A.M. Kamaluddin Ahmed was produced before me by a representative of the S.B Police at the VIP Quarters, Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment. I administered the oath to him and then recorded correctly whatever he stated before me and it was read over to him on completion and he admitted it to be corrected and
Page: 411
signed it. Then I appended my certificate below it as required by law. (This paper is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/12.).
On the 13th of February, 1968 at 1-15 P.M., One Abu Shams Lutful Huda was produced before me by the S.B. Police in the VIP ‘Quarters, Signals Mess, Dacca cantonment. I administered the oath to him and recorded whatever he stated before me correctly and it was read over to him on completion and he admitted it to be corrected and signed it and thereafter, I appended my signature as required by law. (These papers are now marked as Ext.P.W.205 /13.)
The letter which I received from the Deputy Commissioner is now shown to me and is marked P.W. 205/14.
By the letter, now shown to me and now marked as Ext. P. W. 205/15, I forwarded the records of the confessional and other statements which I recorded to the registrar of the Special Tribunal.
On the 6th of March, 1968, the specimen hand-writing of SK. Mujibur Rahman was taken in my presence. He was identified before me by Lt. Aftabuddin. This was taken in the room where Sk. Mujibur Rahman was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment. (The document containing the specimen hand-writing is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/16.)
On the oth of March, 1968, the specimen hand-writing of Bhupati Bhushan Choudhury, Manik Choudhury was taken in my presence in the room where he was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment. (The document in which the specimen hand-writing appears is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/17.) He was identified before me by Subedar Taj Mohammad.
On the 15th of March, 1968 the specimen hand-writing of Std. Mujibur Rahman was taken before me in the room in which he was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment and he was identified before me by Lt. M. Sharif of Pakistan Navy. (The record is now marked as Ext.P.W.205/18.)
On the 1st of March 1968, the specimen hand-writing of M.A. Reza was taken before me in the room where he was detained in the 14-Div., Dacca Cantonment and he was identified before me by Lt. M. Sharif of Pakistan Navy. (The record is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/19.)
Page: 412
On the 1%’ of March 1968, the specimen hand-writing of Sultannddin Ahmed was taken before me in the room where he was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment. He was identified before me by Lt. M. Sharif of the Pakistan Navy (The record is now marked as Ext. P.W. 205/20).
On the 15th of March 1968 the specimen hand-writing of Abdus Samad was taken before me in the room in which he was being detained in Dacca Cantonment. He was identified before me by Lt. M. Sharif of the Pakistan Navy. (The record is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/21.)
On the 6th of March, 1968, the specimen hand-writing of Ahmed Fazlur Rahman was taken before me in the room in which he was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment and he was identified by Lt. Aftabuddin of Pakistan Navy. I see the record here which is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/22.
On the 15th of April, 1968, the specimen hand-writing of Shamsuddin Ahmed was taken before me in the room where he was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment. He was identified before me by Lt. M. Sharif of the Pakistan Navy. The specimen, hand-writing was taken in 3 sheets which are now marked as Ext. P.W.205/23.
On the 15th of April, 1968, the specimen hand-writing of Dr. Saidur Rahman was taken before me in the room where he was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment. He was identified before me by Naib Subedar Md. Saved. (The specimen hand-writing contained in 4 sheets are now marked as Ext. P.W.205/24.)
On the 15th of April, 1968, the specimen hand-writing of Amir Hossain Mia was taken before me in the room where he was being detained in the Dacca Cantonment and he was identified by Naib Subeder Md. Saved. (The specimen hand-writings contained in 4 sheets are now marked as Ext. P.W.205/25.)
On the 15th of February, 1968, Jalaluddin Ahmed appeared before me. It is not recorded whether he was produced by somebody or came of his own accord. I administered the oath to him and then I recorded correctly whatever he stated before me and put some questions to ascertain whether he would make a statement voluntarily and after being satisfied I recorded his statement in the VIP Quarters, Signals Mess, Dacca Cantonment, and
Page: 413
on completion it was read over to him and he admitted it to be corrected and then he signed it. Thereafter, I appended my certificate as required by law (The record is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/26).
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I entered service in 1939 as a member of the Bengal Junior Civil Service that is the Provincial Civil Service. I worked as a Sub-Deputy Magistrate for 10 years and was promoted to the Executive Provincial Civil Service in 1950. I was posted to the Central Government at Karachi from the end of 1953 to early 1962 as Under Secretary and Deputy Secretary in several Ministries. I was promoted to the rank of A.D.M. in 1966. I also worked as a Magistrate before 1947. I was conferred the power of Magistrate 1″ class in 1950 and since then have tried cases in that capacity. I also recorded confessions and statements of persons. I consider that for recording confession the granting of time for reflection is essential. In my opinion, three hour’s time for reflection is sufficient. I have not recorded that I granted three hour’s time for reflection in recording the confession of Mr. Rameez. Nor have I recorded this fact regarding any other confession to which I have deposed today. The confession of Mr. Rameez alone covers 19 pages. The questions and answers cover a little over three pages. My own office is located in the Collectorate and Magistracy, Dacca. On the suggestion of the police authorities, I decided to record the confessions in the signals Mess in the Dacca Cantt. I did not consult the Deputy Commissioner about this. I acted as Additional Deputy Commissioner from October, 1966. I have not recorded my questions in questions and answer form with regard to places where and the time during which the persons in question was detained in police custody. I would have mentioned it if the person in question would have stated as to where he was detained in the Interrogation Centre for any length of time. I have not recorded the time and places, where the person concerned, was kept by the police at different times. Nor did I ask him about it. This is the position with regard to all the persons whose statements I had recorded.
Page: 414
I went on recording the statement as the person concerned continued narrating the statement. I know that the instructions of the High Court in this matter is to record the statement so as to follow as closely as possible the words uttered by the person concerned. In all these statements recorded by me, I do not think I used my own language. This applies to all these statements and I recorded correctly as it was stated to me, I know Bengali. I can write Bengali also, the statements were made in English and I recorded in English none of the persons concerned wanted to make statement in Bengali. (The learned Counsel for the defence wishes to put a question which is of hypothetical nature that if the persons concerned had made the statement in Bengali whether he would have been able to record it in Bengali. This does not arise in view of the statement made by him).
I would not be in a position to write any long statements in Bengali. There …….. PW205(partial)documents missing…………..
The suggestion regarding taking this statement in the cantonment was made after I received the order from the Deputy Commissioner, Probably on the same date. I intimated to the police the date and time when I wanted to record the statements I was coming continuously in the morning at 8-30 a.m. or 9 a.m. Once I started coming to the cantonment for recording the confessional statements. In between, I fixed the dates for my other work in the collectorate. I did not know which accused was to make confession on which date. I only came to know the name when a particular person was produced before me. I did not have any list of persons who would be making the confessions or statements to me. I came to Cantt. according to my convenience. I used to inform Major Hasan, the judge Advocate after coming here that I had arrived. The time when I finished recording of statement is not noted in any of the statements recorded. In all these statements recorded by me I have mentioned the time when the person concerned was produced before me and no subsequent time has been mentioned by me. The whole of the statement of Mr. Rameez was recorded in one day. I had an interval for my lunch. I had my lunch during the said three hours interval which I gave to the persons concerned to reflect. I do not exactly remember as to when Mr. Rameez took his lunch on that day. During this period I sometime finished recording of statements
Page: 415
at 6 or 7 P.M. Some of these statements I recorded may be shorter than that of Rameez. I do not remember whether the persons concerned took their lunch during the period of three hours which was given by me for reflection. They took tea while making statement. I took 3-4 hours in recording the statement of Mr. Rameez. I might have started recording his statement of 12-30 or 12-45 P.M. From the time when a person was produced before me till the conclusion of the statement I did not allow anybody besides my driver to come into the room.
In the statements that I recorded, I did not add anything of my own or omit anything of their statements in recording them. After I started recorded the statements I would not allow a gap or break for doing any official work until I concluded recording such statement. In the case of Rameez when I started recording his statement I did not do any other work until I concluded it. I might have sipped tea while recording the statement. I remember the recording of more than one statement in a day. I never recorded the statement of more than two persons in a day.
The statement of Rameez and that of Abu Shams Lutful Huda were recorded on the same day i.e. 13.2.68. I started recording the statement of Lutful Huda at 1-15 P.M. in that day. The recording of the statement of Lutful Huda would not have taken more than one hour. The statement of Lutful Huda covers seven pages. I do not remember whether I put my signature in page 2 of Ext. P.W.205/13 of the form for recording the statement of Lutful Huda. The cancellation of the page was done after I had put done the signature. It is not correct to say that I kept all these forms already signed at home and brought them here. In the statement of Amir Hossain Ext. P.W.205/10 I have recorded that he came over according to his own choice. I recorded so as he stated so to me. He was actually ushered in by the police and one enquiry as to how he came, he stated that he came of his own chose and as such I recorded the same. In this record of the statement of Anwar Hossain, I stated that the witness went home according to his will because I satisfied myself after asking him whether he wanted to go home of his own sweet-will. I would be surprised to know that he did not go home but was detained in the Cantonment after making the statement.
Page: 416
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
2.12.1968. Present
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim., Member
Mr. T. H. Khan, Prosecution counsel states for the information of the Tribunal that all the approvers are now in Dacca in Military custody.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 417
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
2.12.1968. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A.Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan., S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim., Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.205, MR. G. M. QADRI CONTINUED
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I have not recorded in the statement of Jalaluddin Ahmed as to when he appeared before me. Mohammad Abdul Alim Bhuiyan was produced before me 2-30 PM on the 15th February, 1968. This means that after the three hours time allowed for reflection, he was examined by me at 3-45 p.m. or so. I find from the statement of Dr. Saeedur Rahman’s record that he was produced before me at 10-45 A.M. of the 15th February, 1968. Consequently, his statement must have been recorded at 1-45 P.M. or so.
It was in May, 1968 probably that I went to Lahore from Dacca. There must be an official record about it. The order came from the
Page: 418
services & General Administrations, (Hons) Department, asking me to proceed to Lahore on official duty but the purpose was not specified. The letter came from the Deputy Secretary of the Provincial Government. On arrival at Lahore, I first met Secretary of Al-Falah Organisation. That is an organisation for the benefit of employees. The Home Secretary told me and so also the Deputy Commissioner here to go & meet the Secretary Al-Falah. It is not correct that I attend a conference of the Prosecution Officer in this case at Lahore. I only went and called on Mr. Manzur Qadir, then for two minutes. When I saw Mr. Manzur Qadir there were some other people with him including Major Hasan. I went to see him at his residence. I just went to call on him. It is not correct that Major Hasan took me to the place of Mr. Manzur Qadir. It is correct that Major Hasan was one of my fellows.
Passengers in the plane to Lahore I did not see the I.G. of police or S.B, S.P. or any other officer connected with the investigation of this case in that plane. I did not see Mr. Issa, P.S.P, S.P. in the plane. I did not find any of the accused persons whose confession I recorded hesitating or finding any difficulty in expressing themselves in English I do not understand the word ‘Primed’. I find the word ‘Primed in the statement recorded by me, of Abdul Alim Bhuyian. I find from the context of the sentence that the word should have been ‘permeated’ used here more suitably. I am not at all sure whether the word as written ‘primed’ was used by Abdul Alim Bhuiyan or I wrote it myself. The same word I find in the statement of Shaukat Ali accused as recorded by me. It is correct that it seems to be a mistake for the word ‘permeated’ again. Although I recorded the word ‘primed’ in the two statements mentioned. I did not ask the makers there of to say what they meant by it.
TO COURT: I did not ask them what they meant. By it, although I did not understand the word “primed’.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
It is not correct that the statements were made before me by the confessing accused and those who are now approvers from written
Page: 419
records and I took down the statements. Some of them used to stop while making the statements for an instant or so but I did not put any question to them in that interval. I asked all of them whether they would be able to make a statement in English and they said they would be. I did not tell them that I would be in difficulty if they made statement in Bengali. It is not correct that these persons were made to speak in English before me because of two factors viz that I did not know enough Bengali and further that they had to read out from a draft already prepared. I have noted at the end of Mohsid’s statement that he went home of his own free will which means that he was not escorted by anybody but went by himself. I have not recorded anywhere who produced him, if at all. I see the first page of Form-M.84 on which I recorded the statement of Mohsin. It appears that when he first appeared before me I presumed him to be an accused person and filled up the entries in this page and then I must have asked and found out that he was a witness and I then cancelled the first two pages. I have not noted this fact in this record. I have recorded however that he had been arrested on the 27 January, 1968 at 2-30 p.m. I have noted that he came from the Military officer’s Mess, but as I have not recorded that he was produced by S.B. police or any Military officer, therefore, I presumed that he was not under arrest. (The witness was explained the implication of his record that he was questioned as to when he was arrested and whether he did not mean that he was under arrest actually at the time he appeared before him. The witness now says, ‘yes, he was under arrest’). I find from the statement of Lutful Huda recorded by me, that I gave him the same warning of my being a Magistrate as I gave in the case of accused persons making confession and I also questioned him as to the date of his arrest and so on. Very often I do record in the case of a statement recorded under section 164. Cr. P.C. as to whether the person concerned came of his own free will and went of his own free will or not. It is not correct to suggest that I recorded in the case of these witnesses that they came of their own free will and went home of their own free will at the instance of the investigating staff. It is not correct to suggest that I was taken to Lahore for consultation in this case. The originals or the copies of the
Page: 420
statements which I had recorded at Dacca were not shown to me in Lahore.
In the case of Kamaluddin Ahmed, witness, I have not recorded at the end that he went home after the conclusion of his statement of his own free will. I have recorded on the first page of the record of the statement of Mozammel Hossain that the offence was committed between 1947 and 1968. This was stated to me by Mozammel Hossain himself. I do not Issue gun or pistol, licenses. When I note down about a person that he conducted himself in a straight manner. I mean to say that he acted with himself dignity and freely. I must have written it in the case of Kamaluddin Ahmed because he impressed me in that way. Any other persons whose statements were recorded may not have impressed me to that extent. From what I could gather I thought that there should be some difference between the straight forwardness of this witness and others. I only put down such remarks when I think they are called for. It is not correct that this remark was recorded by me at the instance of the police officers. (The learned counsel for the defence asked Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain accused, to stand up in the dock. He did so and the witness was asked whether he had taken his specimen handwriting, the witness says)- “I do not know. I cannot recognize him”. I don’t think I met him in Karachi. I do not recollect having taken any specimen writing of Lt. Com M. Moazzem Hossain in the VIP Room, Dacca in the presence of Major Hasan on dictation from the “Dawn” or any Bengali newspaper.
If I take the specimen hand-writing of any person I would endorse it and append my signature and certificate below it.
(When the prosecution counsel was asked to say whether any specimen hand-writing of any person was taken by this Magistrate in the VIP Room, Mr. Alim states that he did not have any such papers but he would find out if there is any).
I now see the specimen hand-writing of Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain which bears my endorsement and signature. (This is now marked as Ext. DZ/1.) This I had taken in his room and not in the VIP room. I cannot exactly remember but I think I must have taken his specimen hand writing only once and not twice what I mean to say is
Page: 421
that I do not recollect the room of Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain but I took the specimen hand-writing in the respective rooms of the persons concerned, It would not be necessary to give in the case of a witness, as distinguished from the person who makes a confession, a certificate to the effect that such a confession was voluntarily made but I might have done so in some cases. In the case of K.G. Ahmed, I did so and I did sign a certificate as a confession In the case of Lutful Huda I have signed a similar certificate of voluntariness as a confession. In this case, I considered that even if the statement of an independent witness like a businessman connected with the case is to be recorded under section 164 Cr. P.C, I could not do so in my normal office room because it might create a law and order situation. In the case of Ashraf Ali khan I also recorded after recording his confession that he wants home of his own choice. I would be curious if I am told that he is till under military custody as to why he said he was going home. This remark was made on my question to him and his reply was recorded. There was not particular necessity for me to ask him this question. In the case of Ashraf Ali Khan I have not noted that he was ushered in by the S.B. police or a Military officer or anybody else. Ashraf Ali khan was examined only as a witness and not as an accused. It is recorded that he was given oath. In the statement of Mr. M. M. Rameez recorded at page 15, I find that there are corrections made in this page with regard to dates. Those corrections have been initialled by me. In one case on correction I find that the original date mentioned was 13th July and then it was made into 12h/13th July. In the other case I cannot decipher what was the original date recorded. Probably, what happened was that a minor correction was required in this case and I tried to overwrite it but on finding it illegible. I again wrote above it. (The witness first said that he must have corrected it more than once if the witness asked him to do so and again he said that he could have only asked him to do so only once. I cannot say even after looking through the magnifying glass that the original date was of June and was made into July. It may be that in the following word I first wrote “June” and then made it into “July”
Page: 422
TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
When I was directed to record the statements of the accused and witness as in this case I knew that they were concerned with this conspiracy case but I did not know that they were all Bengalees.
TO MR. MD.ISMAIL
In the case of the accused persons whose statements I recorded, I did make the record of whatever questions I put to them and whatever answer they gave and I also recorded whatever warnings I gave them. When I was asked to record the statement of Mozammel Hossain I did not start an order sheet. I have no prior information that the accused persons would be English knowing. I had put a question to Mozammel Hossain before I actually took down his statement to ascertain the facts of the case. I did not ascertain all the facts from him at that stage. I only ascertained the period during which it took place.
Lutful Huda was not treated as an accused by me. I must have omitted to pen through the word accuse in printed writing. I did not treat him as an accused.
TO MR. ABDULLAH
As Additional Deputy Commissioner, I am both a Magistrate as well as an executive officer. My court room is on the top floor of the building and my general office is on the 2nd floor and ground floor of that building. I have an ejlas in my court room. I was selected for recording confessions and statements under section 164 Cr. P.C. in this case. I saw a press note about this case in the news paper but I do not remember the date of the press note. I do not come to know whether the police had arrested any Army, Navy or Air Force personnel at the time of recording statements. I did not inform Col. Sher Ali Baz about my arrival in the cantonment. I knew Col. Sher Ali Baz. I met him twice but not in connection with the investigation in this case. I do not remember where I met Capt. Shaukat Ali Mia for the first time or even at any time. I met Capt. Shaukat Ali Mia for the first time when he was brought before me for recording his confession. I do not remember if I contacted Major Hasan in his room on arrival in the cantonment and he introduced me to Capt. Shaukat Ali and then we three came in a Jeep to the VIP room for recording his statement. I
Page: 423
do not remember if Major Hasan informed me in that VIP room before leaving that place as to what would be the status of Capt. Shaukat Ali Mia and that he told me that he would be an approver witness. I did not inform Capt. Shaukat Ali Mia before recording his statement that he would not be sent either to Military custody or police Custody but to the Judicial Lockup. It is not correct to say that before recordings his statement Capt. Shaukat Ali Mia asked me whether he could read out his statement from a paper to which I replied that it would be all right. I did not tell Capt. Shaukat Ali Mia after recording his statement that I would go to him subsequently and tender pardon to him. I took about one and a half hours in recording his statement. I have not recorded that fact. I do not remember when I left my Court room (VIP room) on that day. It was the civil police who suggested to me to select VIP room for recording statements. It was some police officer from S.P., S.B. Office. I do not remember his name. He came to me. I did not discuss this matter with any other person. My court room in the VIP quarter was absolutely restricted and not open to the public. The fact that this Court room was in a peaceful atmosphere was not however, suggested by the police. Col. Sher Ali Baz came to me and showed 10/11 places for holding the Court and out of them selected this VIP room. I selected the VIP room as I thought it is the best place for recording the statements. It is not correct to say that I did not fell as free to conduct my business in the VIP quarter as I would have been in my usual court room. The fact that the case was of a political nature was a factor in selecting this room. Too much curiosity from the public was another factor taken in to consideration by me. This particular case created more public curiosity than usual.
I cannot remember at what time I left the Cantonment after recording the statement of Capt. Shawkat Ali Mia. I must have left after finishing my work for the day.
At the time of recording his statement Capt. Shawkat Ali Mia did not have any paper in his hand. He continued to sit in my court room during the period of retention. During this period very often I used to read newspapers and used to go out after leaving my driver there for a short while. I cannot remember whether it was recorded on a Friday. I do not remember whether I allowed him to offer his mid-day prayer or not. It is not correct to say that Major Hasan with my 2 or 3 sons visited me at the
Page: 424
time or recording of the statement of Capt. Shawkat Ali Mia. My daughters attend the Cantonment School. I did ask Capt. Shawkat Ali Mia whether he was ill-treated or not. But I did not put down this question in the form, however, I did not send him to judicial look-up but to military custody as the Military authorities came to me for his custody.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
Manik Chaudhury was introduced to me by a representative of the S.P. Special Branch. The man who brought Manik Chaudhury also identified him before me. About identification, I have not specifically noted in this form. I did not ascertain whether Manik Chowdhury was civilian or military personnel from the person who introduced him to me and I did not ascertain as to why he was detained in the military custody. I would not be able to identify any of the accused persons or the witnesses whose statements I recorded. After recording this statement I sent him to the protective custody of the Military. The Army did not make any prayer for his protective custody. I did not send Manik Chowdhury to the judicial custody because he was produced before me from Military custody. He told me that he was sent to me from Signals Officers Mess. I did not ascertain how long he was detained in that custody.
Nuruddin is my driver and peon. I do not know whether all the political parties were banned on the promulgation of Martial Law. In 1958, I was under Secretary of the Ministry of Defence. I do not know whether Manik Choudhury asked me whether I would be in a position to send him to judicial custody after recording his statement. I do not recollect whether I said in answer to such a question that I would not be in a position to send him to judicial custody. It is not correct to say that Manik Choudhury wanted to make his statement in Bengali. It is not correct to say that Manik Choudhury was made to read out a typed statement before me. It is not correct to say that Manik Choudhury told me that he had already sent a representation to the Secretary, Home Department to the effect that he had been inhumanly tortured in order to extort a confession. It is not correct to say that Manik Choudhury also told me that between 25th December, 1967 and 27″ December, 1967 he was sent to the Jail by the S.B. Police from the Rajarbagh Interrogation Centre with injuries on his persons and that he was examined by the jail doctor, Mr. Samad. It is also not correct to say that
Page: 425
Manik Choudhury told me that he was making the statement from a prepared one to avoid further torture. It is not correct to say that the time for reflection was neither given to Manik Choudhury nor to any other persons whose statements were recorded.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
TO MR. T. H. KHAN (FURTHER DEPOSITION)
I also took the specimen hand-writing of Md. Khurshid on the 1st of March, 1968 in his room and he was identified by Lt. Sharif. (This is now marked as Ext. P.W.205/27).
(FURTHER CROSS-EXAMINATION) TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
These specimen’s hand-writings were not dictated by me. It was written by him of his own accord.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
CORRECTION
3.12.1968.
P.W.205, Mr. G. M. Qadri has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
At page 1165 in the 7th line instead of the “2nd floor,” it should read “1 st floor”.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 426
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
3.12.1968. PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rehman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S. Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As present.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.206, SYED WALIULLAH ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Syed Waliullah, son of Syed Hafizullah, aged 42 years, by faith a Muslim, resident of 13B, Abhoy Das Lane, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I rented out a flat in 13B, Abhoydas Lane to Mr. Manik Choudhury in August, 1967 and the lease continued till December, 1967. I see there the rent receipts Ext. P.W.70/2 up to P.W.70/6. These are the counterfoils of the receipts of rent. These were signed by the tenant or by his representative. The original receipt was signed by me and given to the tenant. I see the signature of Mr. Manik Choudhury on Ext. P.W.70/2. Ext. P.W. 70/3 bears the signature of Bidhan Sen Ext. P.W.70/4 does not
Page: 427
bear anybody’s signature from the tenant’s side. Ext. P.W.70/5 is signed by Mritunjoy Bhattacharjee on behalf of Manik Choudhury. He was the domestic servant of Manik Choudhury. Ext. P.W.70/6 was signed by the same man for Manik Choudhury.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.206
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
The flat was rented out on the second floor of the western side of the ‘Fatema Building. This is part of my house. That is a five-storied building. I was present on 2 occasions when the police visited this house. Manik Choudhury was living in this flat with his wife and children. I was present when Bidhan Sen was arrested by the police. The family of Manik Choudhury was also there at that time. On that day the police also searched the house. Nothing was seized. I signed the nil seizure list that was prepared on that occasion.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 428
DEPOSITION OF P.W.207, SANTOSH KUMAR SHAHA
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION.
My name is Santosh Kumar Shaha, son of late Judhistir Lal Shaha, aged 23 years, resident of 7/5, R.K. Mission Road, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a Senior Assistant of the East Pakistan Co-operative Insurance Society, Dacca. Its head-office is now situated at 24-25, Dilkhusha Commercial Area, Motijheel, Dacca. Before we moved to these premises were having our offices at 9D, Motijheel Commercial Area, Dacca. 4, Jinnah Avenue was our Registered office. I see here a claim form in respect of insurance of a car. The claimant is Mr. Moazzem Hossain and the car involved was numbered EBA 9591. (The claim form is now marked as Ext. P.W.207/1). On the basis of this claim, payment is made. We received a bill from the Punjab Motor Works. (This is now marked as Ext. P.W.207/2). We made payment of this bill. I have brought papers to show this payment. I produce here the office copy of the letter which we wrote to the Punjab Motor Works, Dacca. With it, a cheque was enclosed for payment. (This is now marked as Ext. P.W.207/3). This is an office copy bearing initials of Mr. E. R. Khan, Deputy Manager of our Society.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.207 TO MR. K.Z. ALM
It was on 1.8.1967 that we went the cheque to the Punjab Motor Works. I also produce the satisfaction note given to the Punjab Motor Works by Mr. Moazzem Hossain when taking delivery of the car. (This
Page: 429
is now marked as Ext. DA 1/1.) This bears the date, 27th July, 1967. Form the claim form now handed over to me. I see that the car met with an accident on the 5th of April, 1967. (The claim form is already marked Ext. P.W.207/1.)
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
CORRECTION
3.12.1968.
P.W.207, Santosh Kumar Saha has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 430
DEPOSITION OF P.W.208, MR. EMDAD ALI ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
(As the witness does not know English and Bengali he was examined in Urdu by Mr. T. H. Khan after giving him the oath).
My name is Emdad Ali, son of late Syed Murid Kasem Shah, aged 45 years, resident of 55, Subal Das Road P.S. Lalbagh, Dacca.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am the Manager of the Punjab Motor Works, Dacca. I see here the bill issued by our firm, Ext. P.W.207/2. There was a car accident in respect of Hill-man car No. EBA 9591 which was brought to us for repairs. This bill relates to that. This document was signed by me. The Insurance Company made us the Payment for the bill by Cheque.
CROSS-EXAMINATION DECLINED.
Chairman
Member.
Member.
Page: 431
CORRECTION
3.12.68.
The statement of P.W.208, Mr. Emdad Ali has been explained to him in Urdu and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 432
DEPOSITION OF P.W.209 MR. M, U. KHAN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is M.U. Khan, son of late Md. Yahiya Khan, aged 48 years, resident of B.I.C.A.D., Met. Quarters, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am a Meteorologist at the Airport, Dacca. There is another Meteorologist in-charge of the Patenga Meteorological office, Chittagong. I have brought with me Warning Register which contains warnings given to different ports in respect of adverse weather conditions. On 17th April, 1967 there was a general report entered in this register reading-“In association thunder-storm/showers, gusty/squally winds of speed reaching 25 to 35 miles per hour likely affect your parts today evening/night. Hoist cautionary signal No. 1”. This warning was sent to waterways Noakhali, Comilla, Faridpur, Dacca, Mymensigh, Barisal and Khulna. Cautionary Signal No. 1 means- “your area is threatened by squally winds. Look out for further development”. Signal No.2 means – “a moderate gale or nor-wrester or squall with Maximum wind speed/38 miles per hour, with soon strike, your vessels of 65′ feet and under in length to seek shelter immediately”. This warning signal was issued from Chittagong and we also received it.
I have got this register having summoned it from the Chittagong office. I have nothing officially to do with that office. Our office received a similar warning report from Chittagong. But we have not preserved it.
(NOTE: This witness is not competent to prove official documents obtained from the Chittagong office with which he has nothing officially to do. This should have been done through someone from the Chittagong office).
Page: 434
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I draw up the report which I produce here on 2nd November 1968. This relates to rain-fall reports from 17.4.1967 to 18.4.1967 in respect of the places mentioned in this document. (This document is now marked Ext. P.W.209/1). This is based on the entries in the register which in maintained by ourselves. This gives the rainfall that occurred in various places between the dates mentioned. The original register on which the information was based as given in this document is also here. I produce it which is now marked Ext. P.W.209/2 at the relevant page.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
In the register which I have produced today against Barisal, there is an entry of rainfall on 18.4.67 which reads as 0.85. It has been corrected to 2.10. The correction was made on that very day. I think what happened was that the observer must have made mistake in adding up the rainfall recorded at various hours and later when the report was scrutinized this correction was made. I do not know who the observer was who made this correction. It appears to be correct that in the column in which this correction appears against Barisal, there is no other entry is that vacant column against any other name. In this register, entries are made from time to time by different observers. It is not possible for me to say who made this entry for 17.4.67 and 18.4.67. For Barisal the rainfall was abnormal and also for Brahman Baria, Comilla, Sylhet Chandpur and Hatia. Again said, in Sandwip the rainfall recorded was also abnormal. This distance between Barisal and Comilla may be about 70 to 80 miles as the crow flies. The distance of Sylhet from Comilla may be about 100 to 120 miles as the crow flies. The areas of Dacca and Narayangonj are between Comilla and Barisal. The entries are made in the register Ext. P.W.209/2 as and when the reports are received from the Observatories. The persons who make these entries in this register are not observers themselves. We do not preserve telegrams received from other observatories. We do not receive any correction telegrams. At this moment, I cannot say what is the normal rainfall at Barisal. I say that the entry against Barisal is abnormal as it is so indicated in
Page: 435
the Register. Wherever the entry is underlined it means that this is abnormal. There is no rule of regulation which required that this underlining means abnormal. I also do not remember the normal rainfall of the other stations regarding which I have deposed today. In this register, there is only underlining of certain entries in red pencil on the page marked Ext. P.W.209/2 and no other page. The under lining on this page was done only 2 days back when I prepared this statement when I received intimation that I will have to appear in Court. These entries are only those which are also included in the paper marked Ext. P.W.209/1. This document I prepared on the 2nd November, 1968.
TO COURT
I have not brought the record which might show that this rainfall was abnormal.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman. Member Member
CORRECTION
3.12.1968.
P.W.209, M.U. Khan has read over his statement to himself and now he states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Member.
Page: 436
DEPOSITION OF P.W.210, MR. NURUL HAQUE CHOWDHURY ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Nurul Haque Chowdhury, son of late Badu Mia, aged 39 years, by faith Muslim, Senior Observer, Central Government Office Building. Agrabad, Chittagong.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I have brought some records from my office. One of the registers I have brought is known as the Warning Action Book. This register belongs to the Regional forecasting office at Patenga from where I have brought it. Ours is the head office under which the regional office works. I see in this register a report dated 17.4.67 regarding the warning given to water-ways. (This is marked P.W.210/1). This has been maintained in the Regional Forecasting office at Patenga in the regular course of business. Two of the stations to which warning was sent among others are Comilla and Barisal according to this entry.
On the same day below this warning, there was another warning issued which is now marked Ext. P.W.210/2 to the stations mentioned in the first column. I have not brought any other record from my office bearing on this warning on this date.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
The Patenga Office is about 7 miles from our Headquarters office. The entries are made in this book by different persons at different times. I am not familiar with all the persons who made these entries. Cautionary
Page: 438
Signal Number 1 is a preliminary kind of signal. If there is a cyclone or a disastrous cyclone, for that we ask for signals numbers 9 or 10 to be hoisted, the warning which I have proved in this Register is issued to Waterways in respect of small crafts the country boats. The duty assistant who happens to be on duty communicates these signals. He issues telegrams to various offices to whom the warning is to be conveyed. I find that there is a time noted in pencil by the side of this entry which I take it to mean was the time when the communication was sent. The other entries on this page are in ink. I cannot say who has made this pencil entry or when it was written. There is no indication in this.
CORRECTION
3.12.1968.
P.W.210, Nurul Haque Choudhury has read over his statement to himself and now he states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 439
DEPOSITION OF P.W.211, MR. MONIRUDDIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Moniruddin, son of late Wajed Ali Khan, aged 41 years, by faith Muslim. I am now Inspector of police attached to Intelligence Bureau, Dacca.
From the negative marked Ext. P.W.15/5. I prepared a Photostat copy which I see here marked Ext. P.W.204/1. I myself prepared this Photostat copy by a photographic process. My function in my office is that of a Photographer. I prepared this Photostat copy under the orders of Mr. Ahsanullah, D.S.P. of the Special Branch. He had given me this negative.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I identify this negative by seeing it only. There is no mark on it. I put up against the light and saw the writing. I saw the writing in the negative with my own eyes without any aid. I myself signed the Photostat copy. (The witness was asked to read out from negative with his unaided eyes. He read certain words from the negative by putting it up against the light). I do know who had prepared this negative. Mr. Ahsanullah had personally handed over this negative to me. I entered this negative in my register when I received it. I received the negative from him on 21. 3. 68 and prepared the Photostat copy on the same day. I do not know in whose handwriting the chit attaches to the Photostat copy is marked in red pencil with the number I.
Page: 440
TO MR ISMAIL Nil.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman
Member
Member
CORRECTION
3.12.1968.
P.W.211, Moniruddin has read over his statement to himself and now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 441
DEPOSITION OF P.W.212, MR. MD ABDUS SATTAR
CHOWDHURY ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Abdus Sattar Chowdhury, son of late Mozammel Ali Chowdhury aged 42 years, by faith Muslim. I am now Inspector of police, Special Branch, Special Team, Dacca.
I am attached to the Special Branch of police, Dacca from 1966. I was made a member of the investigating team in this case by order of the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dacca. The order which I referred to is here and now marked Ext. P.W. 212/1. This order was dated 5.3.68 I examined the witnesses and the seized documents in this case. I seized the documents in the presence of the witnesses and prepared a seizure list which is already marked as Ext. P.W.86/1. This bears my signature; I seized the documents already marked as Ext. P.W.86/2 to P.W.86/8 from the office of the senior Accounts Officer, Telephone Revenue, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.212
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I examined Mr. K. G. Ahmed, Lt. Com. Shahidul Huq and Mr. Waliullah as witnesses. I hold the rank of an Inspector of police. I can investigate on my own without any authority in cognizable cases. I investigated the case on the authority of an order from the A.D.C. The authority that I obtained from the A.D.C. was for a preliminary enquiry. This case had not been registered in any Police Station when this authority was given. Until now this case perhaps has not been registered in any police Station. I did not investigate the case on my own authority. I joined the team of Investigators on 1.4.68 when I got this order. Part of
Page: 442
this investigation was assigned to me from time to time by my Chief Investigator, Mr. Ahsanullah DSP and the Supervising Officer, Mr, M. A. Khaleque, SSP, Special Branch, my S.P. and D.S.P. briefed me about this case when I joined the team. They gave me the facts of the case orally. After the receipt of the order from the ADC, Dacca. I was briefed about the case by my S.P. and D.S.P. This briefing was done when I was alone. On the first day when I was briefed, Mr. Ahsanullah and Mr. Khaleque were the only persons present with me. From time to time there used to be some conferences between the investigators and our Superior officers. In this consultation sometimes all 7 of us used to be present and at other times 3,4 or 5 were present. In these conferences, the officers used to place their reports with regard to work they had done.
The superior officers used to issue further orders after scrutinizing these reports. Sometimes the job of examining witnesses was allotted to different officers at the conference. So far as I am concerned I was given orders to examine 3 witnesses. So far as I am concerned I examined the witnesses only once and not more than once. The first witness I examined, in this case, was 7.4.68. The orders relating to the examination of these witnesses were given to me orally by my superior officers. I noted the facts in my case diary. The direction was given to me on the 7th and I noted so. On the 7th of April, 1968 I was directed to examine only Mr. Waliullah. On 15.4.68, I was directed to examine the other two witnesses. On the 1st of April, when the authority was communicated to me I had no idea about any witnesses of this case. Occasionally, I read the newspaper reports about this case. It may be that a Govt. Press-note was issued in connection with this case by the Ministry of Home Affairs.
I see the copy of the Morning News dated Dacca, the 7th January, 1968. In the press note issued in this paper, it is stated that the investigation in the case had nearly been completed and the case was expected to come up for trial soon. It further stated that during the investigation most of the persons under detention had confessed the respective parts played by them. (This evidence is being accepted subject to the production of a copy of the press note in question to be called from Government.) The number of persons given in this press note comes up
Page: 443
to 28 as under arrest. The name of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman is not included in the list of accused in the press note. I do not remember whether this press note was placed in our conference and discussed. Neither I nor any of my associates asked for any of these confessions mentioned in this press note to be made available.
Waliullah, witness, in his statement did not mention the name of Gulam Mohammad. In recording these three witnesses I recorded whatever they stated without omitting anything. Lt. Commander Shahidul Huq stated to me in his statement that early in February, 1966 A. B. Khurshid & Std. Mujibur Rahman met me and requested me to meet one of their leaders who had arrived from Karachi and was staying at Hotel Miska. I agreed and went with them to the Hotel Miska. He further statements me “when I went to hotel Miska they introduced me to Amir Hossain Miah and L.S. Sultanuddin” He further stated to me “I was aware of the nefarious activities of the said group”.
(Note: The contradictions proved are now marked A-A, B-B, C-C and D-D, in the copy of the Police statement of Lt. Commander Shahidul Huq, Subject to admissibility the press note is marked Ext. DB 1/1).
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
On 18th May 1968, I examined Capt. Najmul Huda at 14-Div. Headquarters in the Dacca Cantonment I went to the 14 -Div. Headquarters to examine this accused. This was on the direction of my S.P. Major Naser produced him before me I recorded his statement. At the time of recording his statement, Major Naser was not present. At that time there was nobody else present besides Capt. Najmul Huda. It is not correct to say that I went there and met Capt. Najmul Huda and asked his father’s name only in the presence of Major Naser and thereafter, stated, that would do. When I went there I knew that he had already made a confessional statement. I have noted it in my diary that I went there to examine him. It is not correct to say that I went there for intimidating and coercing him to made further statements implicating others. I did not examine Capt. Muttaleb. I examined Capt. Khurshiduddin Ahmed on 15.4.68. I also examined Sgt, Abdul Jalil on 15.4.68, L. S. Noor
Page: 444
Mohammad on the same day, Mr. Mahboobuddin Choudhury on the same day, Subedar Abdur Razzak on 18.5.68 Risaldar Shamsul Huque on 18.5.68, Sgt. Shamsul Huq on 18.5.68. These statements I recorded in pursuance of an order of my S.P. and D.S.P.
TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED:
I investigated this case from 7.4.68 to 18.5.68. I do not know that before I took up the investigation of this case. Military Officers had investigated the case. It is not a fact that I was aware that the Military Officers had already investigated the case.
It is not correct to say that during my investigation as well as during the proceedings here the Military officers are in charge of this case. The military officers did not supervise the investigation not did they supervise the conduct of the case. It is not correct that the role played by the military, in this case, is being completely suppressed by the prosecution.
Page: 445
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
4.12.1968. PRESENT
Mr. Justice S. A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chariman. Mr. Justice M. R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.212, MR. MD. ABDUS SATTAR CHOWDHURY CONTINUED
TO MR. MD. ISMAIL
It is not correct that the whole of my investigation was of the preliminary type. The investigation I did was a regular investigation under the Criminal Procedure Code from 7.4.1968. The preliminary and the regular investigation went on side by side. Actually, I should not have described it as a preliminary investigation. It was a regular investigation from the start under the order of a Magistrate. I do not
Page: 446
remember if I questioned Shahidul Haque P.W. as to why he did not report to the higher authority the nefarious activities of the group.
TO MR. ABDULLAH
I have heard of the expression, “Team of Investigators” in respect of earlier cases also than this case. In cases generally, there is only one Investigator. As far as, I am concerned the case diary I submitted is a supplementary case diary. I do not know about the other members of the team. My Special Superintendent of Police and D.S.P received the diary from me. Occasionally they passed orders on my case diaries. The orders were sometimes passed in writing and sometimes orally.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I closed my case diary on 20.5.1968. I did not call upon any other officer to assist me in the task assigned to me.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman. Member Member
CORRECTION
5.12.1968.
P.W.212, Mr. Abdus Sattar Chowdhury as read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 447
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 213, MR. MD. ABDUL MAJID ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Abdul Majid, son of late Zamiruddin aged 34 years, by faith Muslim. I am now Special Superintendent of Police, S.B, Dacca.
I was put in charge of the investigation in this case under orders of the Police Directorate. On the 21st of January however, I was withdrawn from the investigation which was then entrusted to Mr. Khaleque. I did nothing in this case, therefore.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I am Special Superintendent of Police of the Special Branch, Dacca. I did not arrest any of the accused persons in this case. I was not even present at the time of the arrest of the accused but I was only asked to provide transport for taking Mr. Ahmed Fazlur Rahman, C.S.P. and Mr. Ruhul Quddus, C.S.P. after arrest to the central Jail. This was probably sometime in December, 1967. From the Central jail, they were taken to a place known as ‘Banani’ under orders of the Provincial Government from the Central Jail. I accompanied them. As far as I know, they were arrested under the Defence of Pakistan Rules”. It is correct that the Government initially passed orders for their detention in the Central Jail, Dacca but subsequently they passed orders for sending them to ‘Banani’. I saw the subsequent orders passed by the Home Department. I cannot say under what law the subsequent order was passed. These two officers were kept in the same building in two separate wings at ‘Banani’. When I first escorted them to the Central Jail, I had taken them up from the office of the Inspector-General of Police. There was some other civil
Page: 448
police officer present at the time I went there but I do not think there was any military officer present. I do not remember to have been any officer from the Central Intelligence Agency there. I was only there for about ten minutes and then the I. G. asked me to escort them to the Central Jail. As far as, I remember during those ten minutes Mr. Ahmed Fazlur Rahman wanted his car.
They were for about half an hour in the Jail office. It is not correct to suggest that the order for detaining them in the Central Jail, Dacca was merely a cover for sending them to Banani and subject them to interrogation and torture. The accused persons and I did not sign in the Jail gate register when we entered there. The other officers had done so who accompanied us. Mr. Muklesuddin, DSP and some other Police Officers were in charge of the arrested persons who were kept in Banani. I cannot remember the names of the other officers. I only orally told Muklesuddin Ahmed to keep them in proper custody there. I do not keep a personal diary. I did not make any record to show to whom I had entrusted them for their custody. It is not correct that I was merely there to keep other officers’ company and other officers arrested them and they took them to Banani for interrogation purposes.
TO MR. MD. ISMAIL
I did not supervise any investigation in this case. I have submitted a case diary of mine to Mr. Khaleque for the only day that I was in-charge. I did not note in my diary that Mr. Quddus was interrogated by me.
TO. MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
We had reached the jail gate at about ‘Iftar’ time. We broke our fast inside the jail. The jail authorities did make some entry in their register while we were there. I did not look at the entry. I had taken them to the jail to put them in the jail custody, the jail authorities therefore, observed all the formalities required for that purpose. I do not know whether they prepared a card for each of the accused in the jail office. I made no written application to the jail authority to take them to Banani.
Page: 449
This was done under the Govt. orders. The subsequent order of the Govt. must have been given to the jail authority. One of the two DSPs with us namely Mr. Yunus or Mr. Muklesuddin had the subsequent order with him. That order was given to the jail authorities. I cannot remember now which of the two officers gave that order to the jail authorities. I did not notice if the signatures of the 2 accused were taken by way of acknowledgment on this subsequent order or not. I was not in the room when the order was served, I was in another room. There were half a dozen Police officers who went inside the jail gate with us accompanying the two accused. I did not mark anyone of them signing the jail gate register I did not sign the outgoing register of the jail. Nor did I notice if anybody else did so. I never interrogated any of the accused persons in this case. It is not correct that I interrogated Mr. Ali Reza accused from 11th December to 18th December, 1967 at the Rajarbagh Centre. I was not present when he was interrogated by other officers. My office is in the Rajarbagh Centre. I did not see any military officer interrogating Ali Reza accused in this period but there were some military officers also in the centre coming and going during this period. Those officers were coming for interrogating the accused persons. I did not find out the names of the military officers who were thus coming and going during that period at the Centre. I had my other officers with them. I cannot remember now the names of those officers. There was a record kept of the visits of those military officers and my officers being with them who interrogated the accused persons. Inspector Badruddin was keeping the record under my orders. I saw those records myself but I cannot name the officers. I have not noted in my case diary the fact that the military officers and certain officers of mine had been deputed to this work. The military officers did not come to my room but they used to go to the D.I.Gs room. I was not present in the D.I.Gs room at the time of any talk between those military officers and the D.I.G. I had not talk with those military officers about this case. I may have had some polite conversation with them. It is not correct that I was a witness to any torture to Ali Reza and that I tried to persuade him to become an approver to implicate other persons. Std.
Page: 450
Mujib was also at the Rajarbagh Centre for sometimes. I cannot remember the period when he was there. Sultanuddin and Kamaluddin were also kept there for sometimes. I do not remember how long Kamaluddin was there. It is incorrect that Kamaluddin was tortured and severely beaten in the Rajarbagh Centre. I read in the newspaper that he was a witness in this case. I cannot remember how long Sultanuddin was kept there. Dr. Saidur Rahman also kept there for some time but I cannot remember how long he was there. It is incorrect that Dr. Saidur Rahman was ever transferred to the Rajarbagh Police Hospital. Form Rajarbagh he was directly sent to the jail. Whenever any of the persons kept in the Rajarbagh Centre complained of any ailment the Police doctor was called there. I know of Dr. Saidur Rahman being sent to the jail from the centre because a detention order thus requiring him to be sent was received. I do not remember the date of the receipt of that order. It is not correct to say that no second order of the Govt. was served on the accused Mr. Fazlur Rahman and Mr. Ruhul Quddus, about their detention at Banani. I have not noted this fact of service in my own diary.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN Manik Chowdhury was also brought to the Rajarbagh Centre from Dacca Central Jail. But I cannot remember when. I cannot remember how long he was kept at the Centre. He must have kept there for more than a day. I do not remember when Bidhan Krishana Sen was brought to the Centre. Habibus Sobhan, DSP, was under me at the Centre during this period. I had deputed this DSP to assist the Interrogating Officers in interrogating Manik Chowdhury. The Interrogating Officers might be Major Mustafiz, Sqdn. Leader Shamsur Rahman and Capt. Sultan Hossain Shah though I cannot remember their names. I got no report about the interrogation of this accused from Mr. Habibus Sobhan. I do not remember how many days this DSP remained with the Investigating Officers. Habibus Sobhan, however, verbally reported to me that the interrogation had been finished. I did not supervise any interrogation. I had, however, met Manik Choudhury at the Centre. It is not correct that Manik Choudhury
Page: 451
made allegations that he was subjected to inhuman torture by the Interrogation Officers. I did not notice any injury on his person and he looked very happy. It is not correct that on one occasion when Manik Choudhury was beaten I was present and intervened to stop the beating. I cannot remember the name of the officer who brought Manik Choudhury to Rajarbagh. I did not pass any order requesting the Jail authorities to produce Manik Choudhury to the Rajarbagh Centre. When Manik Choudhury was brought to the Central Jail he was being detained under the D.P.R. It did not cross my mind as to why interrogation was being done by the military officers at the Centre considering that Manik Choudhury was a civilian.
I do not know if Manik Choudhury was taken out from the Centre for 8 hours and sent to the military custody centre. I do not know if he was taken away for 8 hours on the 17th December, 1967 from the Rajarbagh Centre to a military centre.
It is correct that A. B. Yusuf was brought to the Rajarbagh Centre. It is not correct that he was also tortured at the Rajarbagh Centre while being kept there. I read in the newspaper that A. B. Yusuf was an approver in this case and was declared hostile. (No other counsel wishes to cross examine the witness).
Chairman
Member
Member
Page: 452
CORRECTION
4.12.1968.
P/W. 213, Mr. Md. Abdul Majid has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
On page 1199 in the 8th line instead of the word ‘place’ it should be arrested persons.
In the last but one line on page 1210 the word ‘even’ should be replaced by ‘but’.
In the last line on that page instead of the words ‘in fact,’ the words should be the fact that ‘.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 453
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 214. MR. SIDDIQUR RAHMAN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Siddiqur Rahman son of Md. Idris, aged 30 years, by faith Muslim, Survey Officer, Central statistical Office, Karachi.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN I have been in the Central Statistical Office since May, 1964 as a survey officer. It was on the 15h May, 1964 that I joined the Dacca regional office. I handed over the charge at Dacca to my successor during December, 1966. I then went for training in Australia. On my return I joined the Dacca office again on 8th February, 1968. I joined in Karachi office with effect from March, 1968. Amir Hossain Miah was a Statistical Investigator in the Dacca Regional office while I was there. I see here a casual leave register relating to the Central Statistical office of Karachi. I am aware that this register was kept in the Central office in the usual course of official business. (The register is now marked Ext. P.W.214/1). I can recognize the signature of Amir Hossain Miah with which I am familiar. I see his signatures on the document shown to me which is now marked Ext.P.W.214/2. In this document, there are certain endorsements made in the Central Statistical office, Karachi. I see the signature of Amir Hossain Miah in the document shown to me which is now marked Ext. P.W. 214/3. I see the documents now marked Exts. P.W.214/4 and P.W. 214/5. They are both signed by Amir Hossain Miah. The first document relates to Dacca office when Amir Hossain Miah was attached to Dacca. I see this from the period mentioned in this document. I belong to the Demography and Social Statistical Division of the Central
Page: 454
office, Karachi. When I was in the Central Statistical Office, Dacca, Amir Hossain Miah was then with me in the same office connection.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I see in the register of the Shaheen Hotel, Khulna shown to me bearing date 7.9.65 an entry against which I find the signature of Amir Hossain Miah which I recognise. (The entry is now marked D.C.1/1.) Mr. Md. Ishaque was the Chief Statistical Officer, Camp Office, Dacca in September, 1965. The practice is that if a leave application is submitted by a subordinate officer before the chief officer he would initial it. I do not find any official endorsement or initials on the document marked Ext. P.W. 214/4. If a subordinate takes leave for a week in case it is casual leave he need not mention that he will prefix Sunday to it. But if it is earned leave he has to mention the addition of Sunday. Casual leave can be asked for 20 days per year.
How many days casual leave at a time can be taken depends on the hand off the department. If a person during the leave period intends to leave station me has to mention in the leave application.
(No other counsel wishes to cross examine the witness)
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 455
CORRECTION
4.12.1968.
P.W. 214, Mr. Siddiqur Rahman was read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
On page 1208 in the 11th line, the word ‘section’ should be replaced by ‘office’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 456
DEPOSITION OF P. W. 215 MR. EJAZ MOHAMMAD
KHAN: AFFIRMATION
My name is Ejaz Mohammad Khan, son of late F. M. Khan, aged 40 years, by faith Muslim.
I am now an Addl. District Magistrate, Sargoda since 29th November, 1968. Before that I was Addl. District Magistrate, Rawalpindi since August, 1965. I recorded the confessional statement of Major Shamsul Alam on 28 January, 1968, in my court room at Rawalpindi. The Army authorities approached the District Magistrate to depute some officers for recording the confessions and the District Magistrate deputed me to do that. Some military officers produced him before me. At that time, all other persons were asked to go out of my court room including the military and police officers and I remained there with my stenographer and Major Alam. I explained to the accused that I am a Magistrate and that he was not bound to make any statement and that if he does so it may he used against him as evidence. After that, I allowed him one hour’s time to reflect. During this time he was allowed to sit in one corner of my court room. After one hour, he again came up before me and stated that he was prepared to make a statement and then I put a number of questions to satisfy me that the statement would be voluntary. The questions that I put to him are all recorded and their answers also. This is the memo, I prepared for that purpose and then I correctly recorded whatever statement he made. After completion I read it over to him and he admitted the same to be corrected and then he put his signature on it. I appended the certificate as required by law. (This statement is marked Ext. P.W.215/1.)
Page: 457
I also recorded the confessional statement of Capt. Khondakar Najmul Huda on the same day after recording the statement of Major Alam. He was produced before me by some Army Officers who also introduced him to me. At the time of recording the statement, there was no other person present in my court room besides the confessing accused and my stenographer. I granted him one hour’s time to reflect and the same explanation as in the case of the first accused I also gave to him and preformed all the formalities. I gave him one hour to reflect. During this time he was seated in one corner of my court room. After that, he again appeared before me and stated that he was prepared to make a voluntary statement. I then put a number of questions and from the answers given to me I was satisfied that he could be making a voluntary statement. I recorded these questions and answers and there after I recorded his statement. After completing the statement I read it over to him who admitted to be correct and signed it. There after I appended my signature to the certificate below it. (The confession is marked Ext. P.W. 215/2.)
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
All the preliminary questions that I put to the confessing accused, as well as the answers given to those questions, have been recorded by me in these statements. Besides these recorded questions I did not put any other questions. I have been doing judicial work since, 1954. I did not know when recording the confession, whether and investigation under Chapter XIV of the Cr. P.C. was proceeding or not. I did not try to ascertain this fact. These accused people were produced one after another. In both the statements, I have recorded that the confessing accused were produced by Army authorities. It therefore, may be that they were put before me by more than one Military officer. I do not exactly remember their names. One of them was Lt. Col. Hasan. I do not remember the names of other officers. I dictated these confessional statements to my stenographer and did not record them in my own hand. The questions and answers were also
Page: 458
type-written. Any previous confessions that I may have recorded as a Magistrate were sometimes type written and sometimes in my own hand. Major Alam was produced before me at 2 P.M. I cautioned him at the first instant for about 5 minutes. The questions and answers also took about 5 to 10 minutes. The accused spoke in a normal manner and at normal speed. Sometimes he paused to collect his thoughts. He did not however, take much time to think. Whatever language he used is reproduced in the statement. Major Alam had some notes before him while he was making his statement to me. He consulted them while making the statement. After recording paragraphs on page ‘7’ there were some other letters in the margin typed by the stenographer which were subsequently corrected by me by serving out and initialled by me. The numbering of the paragraphs by letters was given by me. These letters were not stated by the accused. I corrected the statement before it was read out. Form the bottom of page 7 and again on page 8 I have again given paragraph numbers ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’. This was also dictated by me to the stenographer. They were not mentioned by the accused. Lt. Co. Hasan was not in the court room at the time of recording the statement. It is not correct to say that the accused read out from a typed paper nor is it correct that the last portion was read by me from that typed paper. Major Alam stated to me that he had been in custody since 6th January, 1968. I did not question him as to where he had been kept during this time. There are, however, some minor corrections that do not bear my initials. On page 5 a line has been scored out by the stenographer. This does not bear my initials. I did not think that it is necessary that the certificate appended at the end of this record should have been in my own hand writing. It is signed by me. I did not take the signature of the accused on each page. I only took it at the bottom of the statement. I handed over the records to the Army authorities. The District Magistrate’s order directing me to record the statements was in writing. That order was kept with the court record.
Normally, the accused are sent to judicial custody after recording the statement. In this case, however, the accused were handed over to the Army authorities.
Page: 459
TO MR. MD. ISMAIL
As the accused kept on speaking I kept on dictating, in each case. I took down the statement almost in his language. The language was that of the accused but the lettering and the paragraphing were made by me. This is what I mean by the word ‘ almost’. Before reading it over to the accused I made the correction. I only corrected the grammatical mistakes. At the time of correction I never supplied any missing link. I remembered almost everything that I dictated at the end of it. The dictation was not taken in shorthand but it was typed as I dictated.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
The preliminary questions and answers took not more than 15 minutes in all. I took about an hour or so in recording the statement of Major Shamsul Alam. I completed recording the statement in about an hour’s time and there after I corrected it also and read it over to the accused. I started recording his statement at about 3-10 P.M. The accused himself did not read the statement. It was read out to him. I am quite certain that I finished recording the statement before 4 P.M. It is not correct to say that it took much more than one hour in hearing the witness and dictating the same to the typist and getting it typed. I took another 5 minutes to read it and correct it and also read it over to the accused. I made the corrections while reading it out to the accused. I read it is I was correcting the statement. The questions and answers are identical in both these two cases except for the date of arrest. The reason for making the confessions in answers of both accused is identical. The form which I have used in recording the statement was prescribed before Independence. I have added some questions in order to conform to the High Court circulars. In the case of Major Shamsul Alam while recording his statement the form was not available and I had the form typed out myself. The form was already kept typed before I recorded the statement. In the morning I was informed that two accused persons would be produced before me and after hearing that I got one form typed as one was available and then I directed the production of the accused at the particular time that was given, Major Alam was produced first. I used
Page: 460
the typed form first. All that I was informed in the morning was that two Army officers were to be produced. Their names were not disclosed to me at that time. This information was given to me by the District Magistrate. I have no record to show this. Without looking at the paper I cannot say whether the order of the D.M. stated that I was to record the statements of 2 or more persons. I got some forms typed as I got only one printed form. There is no particular reason why I used the printed form while recording the statement of Capt. Huda. I took about an hour in recording the statement of Capt. Huda. It is not correct to say that I dictated this confession of Capt. Huda from a draft that was handed over to me by the military authorities. It is not correct to say that the accused read a few lines from a draft and then it was handed over to me and I read a few lines and then handed it over to my stenographer and he typed it out. I have not noted in this form that I was requested by the D.M. to record these statements. I did not prepare any separate order sheet with regard to these statements. I have not mentioned in these papers that a request was made to the D.M. by the military authorities for recording these statements. It is not correct to say that I started recording the statements on the request of the Military authorities directly made to me. I do not know Major Haque Nawaz.
My Court hours in the month of January, were from 9.00 A.M. to 4.00 P.M. with a break of 45 minutes from 11.00 to 1.45 P.M. It is not correct to say that Major Haque Nawaz and Col. Hasan and one other military intelligence officer was sitting in my retiring room when the statement of Capt. Huda was typed by my stenographer in that room. The military authorities requested me to go to a military barrack in the cantonment for recording these statements but I refused to do that. I did not ask any of these accused persons specifically as to which custody they were is or where they were kept before they were produced before me. Nor did I ask them whether they were at any time put under Judicial custody or not. I did not ask them whether they were produced before any Magistrate within 48 hours of the arrest or after 48 hours or at any time. I was informed that the case was being investigated by the Army authorities. I thought one hour’s time was sufficient for reflection. The
Page: 461
forms for recording these statements have been described by me as annexure-A. I did not ascertain the facts of the case before I started recording the statements themselves. I did not ask the confessing accused person to this effect that “please better speak the truth” before recording statements.
It is not correct to say that the statements were not voluntary and I did not take any effort to ensure this. It is not correct to say that the confessing accused person at first refused to read out the prepared note then Capt. Huda was taken up by Col. Hasan and then he was brought back after 40 minutes to them, Capt. Huda started reading out from this note. The Typist did not read out after typing each sentence.
(No other counsel wishes to cross examine the witness).
Chairman
Member
Member
Page: 462
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
5.12.1968. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-Ul-Hakim, Member.
For the prosecution: As before For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 216 MR. NAUBAT KHAN ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Naubat Khan, son of Azad Khan, aged 55 years by faith Muslim, D.S.P, Special Branch, Peshawar.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am posted as D.S.P, Special Branch Police, Peshawar since 15 December, 1967. I know Jan’s hotel, Peshawar. I took into possession a hotel register from that hotel along with a bill book. I prepared a recovery memo in the presence of one witness. This recovery was made on 13th February, 1968. I see here the recovery memo which is now marked Ext. P.W. 216/1. I see here the register and bill book which I took into possession at that time.
Page: 463
(The bill book is now marked Ext. P.W. 216/2 and the register is marked. Ext. P.W. 216/3).
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I attended Jashn-e-Khaibar this year. I do not know if it is celebrated in October or November. This year it was celebrated about a month ago. I cannot say if people came from all parts of Pakistan to attend it. They have an exhibition of industrial products, music, concerts, etc. There is no animal show.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
CORRECTION
5.12.1968.
P.W. 216, Mr. Naubat Khan has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows.
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 464
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 217, MR. ZAHUR ELAHI BEG
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Zahur Elahi Beg, son of late Noor Elahi Beg, aged 42 years, by faith Muslim, Inspector, Security, Special Branch, Lahore.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am Inspector, Special Branch, West Pakistan, Lahore. I seized the PIA Flight manifest from the PIA office, Lahore on 26th February, 1968 and prepared a recovery memo which I see here and is now marked Ext. P.W.217/1. This recovery was made in the presence of witnesses and the memo is signed by me and in my hand. The manifest that I took into possession is here and is now marked Ext. P. W.217/2.
CROSS-EXAMINATION Declined.
Chairman. Member.
CORRECTION
5/12/1968.
P.W. 217, Mr. Zahur Elahi Baig has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows: The statement is correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member.
Member
Page: 466
DEPOSITION OF P.W.218, ASWINI KUMAR BISWAS
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Aswini Kumar Biswas son of Late Gongadas Biswas, aged 58 years, by faith Hindu, residing at 380, Chatteswari Road, Chittagong.
(As the witness does not know English, the oath was interpreted by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Registrar of the Tribunal. He will also interpret his evidence).
TO MR. T. H. KHAN:
I know Mr. Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury alias Manik Chowdhury of Chittagong. I am familiar with his signature but not his other writings. I see here on the document Ext. P.W.148/27 shown to me, the signature of Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury alias Manik Chowdhury now marked Ext. P.W.218/1. I see also the document already marked Ext. P.W.148/28. This also bears at the bottom the signature of Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhuly which is now marked Ext. P.W. 218/2.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I am not a hand-writing expert. Originally I am a resident of village Gairala P.S. Patia. I am now residing at 380, Chatteswari Road, Chittagong, Habilash Dwip is about one mile from my village. I am now serving under a contractor Mr. Md. Yunus at Chittagong. The contractor’s office is adjacent to my residence in Chittagong. I have heard the name of Ramjoy Mahajan Lane in Chittagong and I know it too. That is about two
Page: 467
miles from Chatteswari Road. I had not been to the house of Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury at Chittagong but I had been to his shop. Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury has got is shop. He is a wholesaler. For the last 2/3 years he has no shop. Before that he had one. I had been a regular customer of that shop for 20 years ending about 3/4 years back. Originally Bibhuti Bushan’s father used to sit in this shop and then his uncle Tejendra Chowdhury used to sit. I also saw Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury sitting on this shop for 3/4 years ending about 3/4 years back. I never served at that shop myself. I had not personal correspondence with Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury. I had no registered in of my own. I have no paper with me now to show that I made purchases from the shop of Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury. I had not shown any paper to the police to support my statement that I had business dealings with Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury. Nor did I show any such paper to any other authority.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
These papers on which I recognise the signature of Bibhuti Bhushan Chowdhury were not signed in my presence. It was only 4 days back that I was questioned by the O.C. at Chittagong and I was not interrogated by the police before that. I received no summons from this court to appear today. I arrived at Dacca last morning by plane. I purchased my own air ticket. I did not meet any police officer before coming to court today. I was not shown any paper by anybody this morning before coming to court. I did not meet any police officer or Military Officer yesterday. Mr. Yunus, my Master is not a Government Contractor. He is a Tubewell Contractor.
The father and uncle of Manik Chowdhury had other employees in their shop. I used to deal with rice, dal, oil, and other things. These commodities were available at the shop of Manik Chowdhury.
TO COURT
The shop of Manik Chowdhury was in Khatunganj, Chittagong, near the Chand Mia Goalli. Subsequently, they shifted to the premises of Umes Mahajan.
Page: 468
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
Manik Chowdhury used to sit in this shop because it was a joint family business. It is not correct to say that I am not familiar with the signature of Manik Chowdhury. It is not a fact that I am a procured witness. (The witness was given the document Ext. P.W. 148/27 and asked to read from the top of the page. He said “I cannot read without glasses. I left my glasses at home today”).
TO COURT
I have recognized the signature on this document in the light of the lamp. (The witness was therefore asked why he could not read the upper portion of the document shown to him. He has now read it). He says-it reads ‘Mustansir Commercial Co., Importers and Exporters, 610, Ramjoy Manajan Lane, Chittagong. To the Director of Survey, 309, Peshwar Road, Rawalpindi’.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I cannot say whose signature appears on the document shown to me marked Ext. P.W. 205/17.
TO COURT I have read up to the 8th Class.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member.
Member.
Page: 469
CORRECTION
The statement of P.W. 218, Aswini Kumar Biswas has been read over and explained to him in Bengali by Mr. Atiar Rahman, Assistant Register of this Tribunal, and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman
Member
Member
Page: 470
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 219. MR. A.M.M. ZIAUL HAQUE
KHAN LODI ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A.M.M. Ziaul Haque Khan Lodi, son of Mvi. A.Z. Khan Lodi, aged 42 years, by faith Muslim. I am Inspector of Police attached to S.B., Dacca.
I am attached to the Special Branch of Police at Dacca from 29th November, 1967. On 8.1.1968 I received the order from A.D.C, Dacca appointing me a member of the Investigation Team in this case. (The order is now marked Ext. P.W.219/1). I examined a few witnesses and seized certain Alamats as produced by Major Naser at 14 Div. Headquarters and also took possession of one scooter from the Rangpur Army Camp. I also took possession of T.A. Bill Claim Form produced before me by Major Naser. I prepared a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. This is the seizure list for the T.A. Bill Claim Form now marked Ext. P.W. 219/2 which is signed by me. The T.A. Claim Form which was taken possession of is here and is now marked Ext. P.W. 219/3. The seizure list which I now see and which is marked Ext. P.W. 219/4 is the one which I prepared on seizing the admission and discharge registers relating to CMH, Comilla and CMH, Dacca as produced by Major Naser. The two registers which I seized are here and are now marked Exts. P.W. 219/5 and 21976. I see here the seizure list with regard to the seizure of the Auto-cycle already marked Ext. P.W. 158/1. All the seizures were made in the presence of the witness. That Auto-cycle is lying just outside the Court Veranda.
Page: 472
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I had asked Major Naser to produce these documents. There is no search warrant for these. Major Naser knew that I was one of the Investigating Officers. I had asked for these documents from Major Naser specifically. I do not know from where Major Naser got those documents. I knew that he had these documents with him because I was in contact with him as an investigating officer of this case. I could have gone to the hospitals myself to seizure these registers. I had asked Major Naser to get the T.A. Claim Form from the Army Headquarters. I had previously asked Major Naser to get these documents for me. I had asked him verbally. This fact is not mentioned in the recovery memo. I have got my own case diary. I have not noted in my case diary the fact that I had asked Major Naser to get these documents for me. I do not know if Major Naser is a member of the investigation team. Nor do I know if he was doing anything in the investigation work. I only know that he is a Major and I do not know whether he belongs to land forces. I do not know Lt. Sharif. I may have seen his name in the papers only. I only saw the newspaper reports in which it appeared that defence was alleging that Lt. Sharif was responsible for torturing the witness. I have not read in the papers that he was taking the accused persons to Rajarbagh Centre and interrogating them.
I come from Pabna district. Lt.Com. Moazzem Hossain belongs to Navy. I did not arrest any of the accused persons in this case nor was I present at the arrest of anyone of them. The order directed me to make an investigation under section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I was told that the case to be enquired was that some Army and ex-Army personnel had considered together to seduce other Army personnel and to separate East Pakistan from West Pakistan. It was my S.P. who had given me this information orally, First Mr. Majid, then SP gave me this information and later I got this information from my DSP Mr. Ahsanullah. Mr. Majid was associated with this investigation for about a fortnight. He was the supervising officer of this investigation. Mr. Majid never sat at our conference but we used to sit together to discuss with the
Page: 473
team. I do not remember exactly whether the order mentioned therein was a preliminary examination. Even if it was a preliminary investigation I would take down the statements of the witnesses. I had recorded the statements of the accused persons who are now accused but were not so at that time. I did not distinguish the witnesses from the accused at any stage. I examined nine persons who are now accused. At the time, when I examined them, they were under military custody but I examined them as persons not accused. (The witness made all kinds of varying statements as to when they were cited as accused, first saying that they were cited as accused by the Police at the start of the case and then said that they were cited by the Government and then said Govt. made orders and again he said that this was done when the Tribunal was set up. He eventually said “I do not know”). I have no idea whether a complaint was lodged in this case. I have not submitted any report saying as to what offence was made out in this case. The accused are being tried by this Tribunal under sections 121A and 131 P.P.C. I do not know if any Govt. sanction is necessary for the prosecution under these offences. By the order by which I was authorised to investigate, Mr. Ahsnallah was also authorised. Before this order was passed I had no idea about the case or that I would be asked to investigate. I did meet Major Naser in connection with this case and also Col. Sher Ali Baz. I had examined Lt. Col. Amir Mohammad Khan. I do not know if he was one of the Investigating Officers. I examined him in connection with this case. I did not examine Amir Hossain Mia. I examined Abdul Alim Bhuyian on 15.4.1968 and 9.5.1968. I did not know before I examined him that he had already made a confession before a Magistrate on 15.2.1968. The 9 persons who are now accused and whom I examined include A.B. Khurshid, Daliluddin, Ali Reza, Sultanuddin, Abdur Razzaque, Mr. K.M.S. Rahman, C.S.P. Fazlul Haq, Major Shamsul Alam and Capt. Shaukat. I examined them under the order of Mr. S.P. These names were given by the S.P. at different times. Mr. Khaleque was the S.P. who instructed me. I met Col. Sher Ali Baz after receiving the authority to investigate this case. I met him at his office I do not know what he was doing in this case. When I came to the cantonment to examine the
Page: 474
witnesses then I met him at his office in the cantonment area. I found Col. Sher Ali Baz in another room of the building in which I examined the witnesses. This call of mine was just a courtesy call. That was the first time I met him. On my enquiry the Sentry told me about the presence of Col. Sher Ali Bez in that room. The veranda is common to be the room occupied by Col. Sher Ali Baz and that of the witnesses. On that day, there was talk about the case with him. We only exchanged good wishes.
Afterwards, I came to know that he was in charge of the Army Investigation in this case. I examined Ali Reza twice but only once all other accused persons whom I have mentioned earlier. These statements that I obtained by examining these accused persons were kept with me all along. I did not forward them to any person at any time. I did not examine anybody at the Rajarbagh interrogation centre. I examined Md. Mohsin in my office. My office is situated at Santinagar. I do not know whether it is called as Rajarbagh Police Centre. Mohsin was called by me. Mohsin was examined by me on 28.1.68. I did not tell him that his business will be in jeopardy if he did not depose properly. I did not give him any idea of the case in respect of which he was to depose.
I did not mention in the seizure list Ext. P.W.219/2 that Major Naser had produced the documents mentioned therein. I have not mentioned the place where the documents were brought. Three officers mentioned in the authority letter Ext. P.W.219/1 used to examine the witnesses separately. Sometimes we used to sit together and exchange information about the activities of one another. In such sittings, three other members of the investigating team also used to participate. They were Abdus Sattar Chowdhury, Inspector, Md. Israil, Inspector, and Md. Abdus Samad Talukdar, Inspector. In our conference, no Army officer attended. In the course of our investigation we did not come to know as to what the Army officers had been doing in connection with this case. Nor did we inform the Army authorities as to what we were doing in connection with this case. 20.5.1968 is the last date of my examination of witnesses. I examined that day warrant officer Iqbal Osmani. Besides the nine accused who are already mentioned, I also examined Md. Mohsin, Mainuddin, Ensaf Ali, Serajul Islam, Capt. Abdul Alim Bhuiya,
Page: 475
Mossaraf Hossain, Ashfaq Mia, Ex. Sqdrn. leader Moazzem Hossein Chowdhury, Zaker Ahmed, Razzab Hossain, A.K.M.A. Hye, Abdul Halim and Golam Ahmed. I examined Zaker Ahmed and Ashfaq Mia on 8.5.1968 at the office of the 14h Div. Head quarters. I got them through Major Naser. I requested Major Naser over phone to produce these two persons and he did so when I arrived. This is not noted in my diary. It is not corrected to say that the witnesses Zaker Ahmed and Ashfaq Miah were produced before me without my calling for them. It is not noted in my diary as to when I left the necessity of examining these two persons. Ashfaq Miah is a PAF personnel but his exact rank is not known to me. His name appears only as Ashfaq Miah in my diary before I examined him. It was on 6.3.1968 that I first came to know the name of Ashfaq Miah. I cannot say whether Zaker Ahmed was under detention or not at that time. He appeared before me as a free man. I asked Major Naser to produce him before me because he was an Army personnel. He was a PAF personnel. I asked Major Naser to produce Zaker Ahmed because Major Naser was maintaining liaison between Army personnel and me. It is not correct to say that Zaker Ahmed was not a PAF personnel when I examined him. He has already retired. He was at that time serving in the Plant Protection Department. This was not known to me before I examined him. Yes, it is true that I have described Ashfaq Miah as Wing Commander Ashfaq when I recorded his statement. I do not know what is meant by “I.S.I. Detachment”. I made no enquiry from Inter Service Intelligence Detachment. After recording the statements of Zaker Ahmed and Ashfaq Miah I did not try to seize any document. It is not correct to say that I was only assisting and acting according to the directions of the military personnel in conducting the investigation. Nor it is correct to say that I did and wrote whatever was suggested and dictated by the military officers.
TO MR. K.Z. ALAM
The passages marked A to A, B to B, C to C and D to D on the copy of the statement represent correctly the statement of the witness Sirajul Islam as he made it before me.
Page: 476
The passages in the copy of the statement of witness Zakir Ahmed marked A to A, and B to B correctly represent what I recorded of his statement.
The portions marked as A to A, B to B, C to C, D to D and E to E in this copy of the statement of Capt. Abdul Alim Bhuiyan correctly represent what I recorded of his statement.
The portions marked A to A, B to B, and C to C in this copy of the statement of Mohammad Ghulam Ahmed, witness correctly represent what I recorded of his statement.
The portions marked A to A, B to B in this copy of the statement of Sgt. Abdul Halim; witness correctly represents what I recorded of his statement.
The portions marked A to A. and B to B in this copy of the statement of witness Mosharraf Hossain Sheikh correctly represent what I recorded of his statement
In recording the statement of the witnesses I did not omit anything to record as stated by them, nor did I add anything of my own.
TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
I recorded the statement of Rajab Hossain on 11.5.68. I recorded the statement under section 161 Cr. P.C.
TO KHAN BAHADUR NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
I did not come across any paper relating to this case drawn up before the East Pakistan Police came to investigate this case. I did not come across any confession or statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. before the East Pakistan Police came to investigate this case.
TO MR. ABDULLAH
I examined Capt. Showkat Ali Mia at 14 Div. Hqrs. on 15.4.68. He was produced before me in the Officers’ Mess. It is a room in which he was staying. I cannot say whether anybody else was staying with Capt. Showkat Ali Mia in the same room. When I examined him, Major Hasan was not there with me. I recorded his statement under Section 161
Page: 477
Cr.P.C. It is not correct to say that I accompanied Major Hasan and D.S.P., Mr. Ahsanullah to the room of Capt. Showkat Ali Mia on 15.4.68 where Capt. Alim was also residing and that in my presence. Major Hasan and D.S.P. Mr. Ahsanullah made a rehearsal as to how Capt. Showkat Ali Mia should answer the cross-examination of the defence.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I examined Warrant Officer Mosharraf Hossain Sheikh only once. It is not correct to say that I threatened Rajab Hossain to make a statement according to my suggestion and that otherwise he would be made an accused in this case. It is not correct to say that I produced Capt. Abdul Alim Bhuiyan for recording his confessional statement before a Magistrate. I cannot say who produced him before the Magistrate.
TO MR. NURUL ALAM
I did not examine Lt. Col. Shamsul Alam of Inter Services Intelligence, Dacca. It is not correct to say that I used to visit Major Hasan regularly in his office in the Dacca Cantt. and took his directions in the matter of investigation of this case. It is not a fact that once Major Hasan shouted at me and I complained of it to my Inspector General of Police. It is also not correct to say that the Inspector General of Police communicated this matter to the G.O.C. through the Home Secretary. It is not correct to say that all these statements recorded by me were recorded in the presence of Major Hasan and to his dictation.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness)
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 478
CORRECTION
6.12.1968.
P.W. 219, Mr. M.M. Ziaul Huq Khan Lodhi has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 479
DEPOSITION OF P.W.220, MR. SERAJUL ISLAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Serajul Islam, son of Mvi. Abdul Khaleque, aged 43 years, Inspector of Police, Special Branch, Dacca.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I am an Inspector of the Special Branch of Police, Dacca. This is the order under which I was appointed one of the Investigators in this case. It is already marked as Ext. P.W.219/1. I examined some witnesses in this case and seized some properties. I seized a bill file from the hotel ‘Shahjahan’ Chittagong by preparing a seizure list already marked as Ext. P.W.115/1 in presence of the witnesses. This seizure list bears my signature. This is the bill file already marked as Ext. P.W.115/2 which was seized by me under the above seizure list. In Ext. P.W.115/2. I obtained the signature of the witnesses. I also signed the same. I seizure the provisional sale receipt of a Fiat Car by preparing a seizure list which is already marked as Ext. P.W.138/2 in the presence of witnesses. The seizure list bears my signature. The documents are here already marked as Exts. P.W.6/8 and P.W.6/9. These were the two documents that I seized them.
I seized some carbon copies of the cash memo by preparing a seizure list already marked as Ext. P.W.117/1. The book of Carbon copies of the cash memos which I seized is already marked as Ext.P.W.117/2 and it includes the relevant cash memo already marked as Ext. P.W.117/3. The relevant cash memo is signed by me as well as the witnesses. I also
Page: 480
seized a Hill-man car No. 9591 and some documents by preparing a seizure list already marked as Ext. P.W.163/1 in the presence of witnesses who also signed it in my presence. The seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.163/1 is also signed by me. One of the documents seized is already marked as Ext. P.W.163/2. I obtained the signatures of the witnesses on these documents seized by me.
Page: 481
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
6.12.1968 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT.
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman , H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member. For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 220, MR. SERAJUL ISLAM: TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I had examined Dr. Saidur Rahman u/s 161 Cr.P.C. on 15.4.1968. I also examined ex-Flight Lt. Mirza Mohammad Rameez on the same day. I myself examined Dr. Saidur Ahmed without being asked by somebody else to do so. I joined the Investigation Team on 1.8.1968. I got time to time directions from my superior officers including my DSP. In fact, earlier the Superintendent of Police had asked me to examine Dr. Saidur Rahman. I had no previous papers with me when I went to examine Dr. Saidur Rahman. Normally, I would examine a witness myself before sending him to a Magistrate for recording his confession.
Page: 482
I did not know at the time I examined Dr. Saidur Rahman that he had already made a statement before a Magistrate. I heard it later. It is not correct that I had examined him merely to make him say things which he had not stated before the Magistrate. It is not correct that I was asked to make him implicate other accused persons and to state other incidents which he had not deposed to before the Magistrate. Sometimes we had a conference between the Investigating Officers. When I was directed to go and examine Dr. Saidur Rahman, I did not ask whether he had already been examined by any one or not and this question was not discussed by us. I did not send for the statement he had made before the Magistrate even after I had recorded his statement myself. I have not seen the Magisterial statement until now. I submitted my diary after examining Dr. Saidur Rahman and Mr. M. M. Rameez to my superior officer. I did not know when I went to examine Mr. Rameez that he had about 2 months earlier made a statement to a Magistrate. I had not come to know this even after our conference. Later on I heard, about 15 days after I had recorded his statement. I have not seen that statement before the Magistrate until now. I did not ask for a copy of that statement from my superior officer for comparison with what he had stated before me. I do not know who had produced Mr. Rameez before the Magistrate. In our conferences the Investigating Officers did exchange information as to what each one of us had been doing. In our conferences, none of the officers told me that these witnesses had already been examined by a Magistrate. I did not question these two persons as to whether they had made any earlier statement. I had no knowledge that Dr. Saidur Rahman had sent an application to the Home Secretary alleging that he had been tortured.
I know the accused who is now standing in the dock namely, Bidhan Krishna Sen. I met him for the first time in the Army Camp on the 17th February, 1968. By Army Camp, I mean, in the Cantonment where he was detained. I do not know if he had been taken to the Rajarbagh Centre earlier. I examined him on that very day. During his examination, there was no other officer with me. I had contacted Col. Sher Ali Baz Khan and he sent me to the place where he was detained.
Page: 483
I know Manik Chowdhury accused. He and Bidhan Krishna Sen both come from Chittagong town. I did not meet Amir Hossain Mia nor did I record his statement. I had only heard that he was a suspect but I did not know that he had made an earlier statement by way of confession or otherwise. I know that Bidhan Krishna Sen and Manik Choudhury belong to Awami League. I did not suggest to Bidhan Sen and Manik Chowdhury an independent witness corroborates the complicity of Sk. Mujibur Rahman and Manik Choudhury in this case. Nor did I suggest to him that he should corroborate the statement of Amir Hossain Mia. It is not correct that I told him that unless he fell in with my wishes he would be made an accused person.
Col. Sher Ali Baz was in-charge of the suspects who had been detained in the Army Headquarters. He was the Head of the Army Team that was in-charge of the suspects. I do not know exactly how many persons were in that Army Team. So far as I know Col. Sher Ali Baz was here and did not come from West Pakistan. After my examination of the witnesses, I did not meet Col. Sher Ali Baz but I met Major Naser. I did not meet Major Hasan although I saw him from a distance. I do not know Lt. Sharif. I never met him.
I examined Anwar Hossain P.W. I do not know whether he had been discharged from service by the time I examined him. He was in Army custody when I examined him. I examined him on 13.2.1968. I did not tell him that if he would oblige me he would be reinstated in service. I do not know if he has now been reinstated. I recorded some of the statements in English and some in Bengali. Amir Hossain’s statement was recorded in Bengali and that of Jamaluddin in English. I told Jamaluddin and others that either he could make his statement in English or in Bengali. I said this without any suggestion from anybody else. I had followed this very method in other investigations also. I do not remember the case in which I might have examined a Bengali witness in English previously. I remember now that in a case relating to the Kotwali P.S. in Sylhet the A.D.M. who was a Bengali made his statement to me in English.
It is not a fact that I examined the witnesses in English because they were tutored to make statements in English. I cannot remember any other
Page: 484
occasion on which I might have recorded a statement in English. I cannot name the A.D.M. when I examined. I examined him in 1968 at Sylhet. He was a C.S.P. officer.
I had examined Manik Chowdhury on 15.4.1968. I do not know even in his case that he had already made a statement before a Magistrate. It is not correct that I told Manik Chowdhury while examining him that he was introducing variations from the typed statement he had with him. Nor that this could not help him at all. I never suggested to him that he should make any self incriminating statement rather than an exculpatory statement. It is not correct that I went to coerce Manik Chowdhury to make self incriminating statement knowing that he had already made a statement before a Magistrate.
I examined Ali Ahmed only once. I had recorded a statement of Rameez from 2.00 P.M. to 5.30 P.M.
The statement of Dr. Syedur Rahman was recorded from 8.00 A.M. to 12.00 Noon and of Manik Chowdhury from 12.00 Noon to 1.30 P.M. The statement of Manik Chowdhury covers eight pages of my diary. My diary has the size of foolscap sheets. This statement is in Bengali. I told Manik Chowdhury also that he might make a statement in English or in Bengali. I had examined Dr. Syedur Rahman and Rameez in 14 Div. Mess. It is not correct that they were sitting together and I recorded their statements one after the other. It is not correct that Military or Civil officers were present when I examined them.
TO MR. K.Z. ALAM
The portions marked A-A, B-B and C-C in the copy of the statement of Mirza Md. Rameez shown to me correctly represent what he stated before me.
The portions marked A-A, B-B, C-C, D-D, E-E, F-F, G-G and H-H in the copy of the statement of Dr. Syedur Rahman represented correctly what he stated before me.
The portion marked A-A in the copy of the statement of Jamaluddin Ahmed P.W. represents correctly what he stated before me.
The portion marked A-A in the copy of the statement of Ali Ahmed P.W. correctly represents what he stated before me.
Page:
485
TO COURT: In recording the statements of the witnesses I did not omit anything from what was stated before me nor did I add anything.
TO MR. KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
I do not know if Lt. Col. Sher Ali Baz asked Mr. Ruhul Quddus to give a statement and he declined to do so. It is not correct that Mr. Ruhul Quddus was involved falsely in this case because he declined to make a false statement in this case implicating others.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I did not ask Manik Chowdhury when I examined him as to when he had been brought to the Cantt. in military custody. Nor did I ask him in whose custody before he was brought to the military custody. I did ask him as to when he was arrested. I did not question him as to by whom he was brought into the Cantt. I did not ask B. K. Sen where he was kept and in whose custody before he was brought to the Cantt. I did not ask my superior officers why these two civilians were being kept in the Cantt. I did not make a suggestion to my superior officers that they should be sent to Jail custody. I do not know when they were sent to Jail. I do not know if Manik Chowdhury before being brought to the Cantt. was kept at Rajarbagh and there he was tortured.
TO MR. ABDUL MALEK
It was incorrect that the investigating Officers have falsely implicated Ris. Shamsul Huq in this case.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 486
CORRECTION
9.12. 1968.
P.W. 220, Mr. Sirajul Islam has read over his statement to himself and on states as follows:
On page 1249, in the fourth line instead of ‘Amir Hossain,’ it should be Anwar Hossain. On page 1250 in the fifth line instead of ‘1968’ it should be ‘1960’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page:
487
DEPOSITION OF P.W.221. MR. SYEDUL ALAM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Syedul Alam son of late Kazi Abdur Rais, aged 43 years, by faith Muslim, at present residing at 5, Dilkusha Commercial Area, Dacca.
I am a Senior Traffic Officer in the East Pakistan Shipping Corporation. My office is at No.5, Dilkusha Commercial Area, Dacca. As Senior Traffic Officer my job is to supervise the works of different terminals. We have Terminals at Aricha Ghat and at Goalundo Ghat. They fall within my Jurisdiction. These receipt books already marked Ext. P.W. 113/2 to 113/10 are official books maintained in the terminal at Aricha Ghat in the regular course of official business. These receipt books already marked Ext. P.W. 135/2 to 135/9 are maintained in the Terminal at Goalundo Ghat in the regular course of business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
These two terminals came within the purview of our jurisdiction with effect from the 1st of January, 1965. These terminals were under the control of IWTA before January, 1965. It is not correct to say that these two terminals were under the control of IWTA until September, 1967.
The ferry from Narayanganj to Daudkandi and back runs according to a schedule. It takes two and a half hours for the journey. The fare for transportation of a car is Rs. 15/- at this ferry. The upper class passengers fare is Rs. 47- and that of the deck passengers is Rs. 1.40 paisa. R&H ferry also runs between Demra and Daudkandi via Chatakdi and Char Bausia. The fare there is comparatively cheaper than ours. The fare
Page: 488
charge by Roads and Highways was Rs. 3/- for a car. This has been changed since April, 1967. I cannot remember if this change has been effected in 1967 or in 1968. Now the fare is charged at Rs. 10/- for a car. The R&H route is also shorter and takes less time.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Chairman
Member.
Member
CORRECTION
9.12. 1968.
P.W. 221, Mr. Sayedul Alam has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 489
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 222, MR. ABDUL KHALEQUE ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Abdul Khaleque Sikder, son of Md. Taham Sikdar, aged 42 years, by faith Muslim, at present A.S.I of Ramna Police Station, Dacca.
I am attached to Ramna P.S. since 18th June, 1966. I see the document marked Ext. P.W. 164/6. This is a Jimmanama which I contained from Mujibur Rahman for a track EBA 695. This Jimmanama is in my hand. Mujibur Rahman signed this Jimmanama in my presence. I cannot recognise Mujibur Rahman now. This Mujibur Rahman is described as a son of Shah Munshi Abdul Latif of Sathmajhi, P.S. Madaripur, District Faridpur.
CROSS-EXAMINATION Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Member
CORRECTION
6.12. 1968.
P.W. 222, Mr. Abdul Khaleque has read over his statement to himself and now he states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 490
DEPOSITION OF P.W.223, MR. ABDUS SAMAD
TALUKDER ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Abdus Samad Talukdar, son of Mvi. Samiruddin Talukder, aged 43 years, by faith Muslim, at present Inspector of Police, Special Branch, Dacca.
I am Inspector of Police attached to the Special Branch, Dacca.
I was appointed an Investigator in this case by this order passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Dacca. This is now marked Ext. P.W. 223/1. During the investigation of this case, I examined some witnesses and seized some papers. On the 24th of January, 1968, I seized a hotel register from Hotel Casserina by preparing a Seizure List already marked Ext. P.W. 51/1 in the presence of witnesses. The Seizure List bears my signature. This is the Register already marked Ext. P.W. 51/2 which I took into possession on that occasion. On page 10 of the hotel register, I obtained the signatures of the witnesses. I also signed this page.
On 25″ January, 1968 I seized a Savings Bank Accounts Ledger No. 51 by preparing a seizure list already marked as Ext. P.W. 73/1 in the presence of the witnesses. The seizure list bears my signatures as well as of the witnesses. This ledger card was seized by me. This is already marked as Ext. P.W. 73/4. This card also bears my signatures as well as those of other search witnesses. This ledger already marked as Ext. P.W.73/2 was seized by this seizure list on page 203 of this ledger. I obtained signatures of the search witnesses and I also signed with the search witnesses.
On 5th February, 1968 I seized one Savings Bank Credit Voucher in the presence of the witnesses already marked Ext. P.W.73/6. I also obtained the signatures of the witnesses and also signed the seizure list.
Page: 491
This is the Savings Bank Account Opening Slip already marked Ext. P.W. 73/7. I obtained the signatures of the search witnesses on these documents and also I signed it myself as well.
On 2nd February, 1968, I seized one of the accounts opening forms by preparing a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. The seizure list is already marked as Ext. P.W. 73/5 which bears my signatures. I obtained the signatures of the witnesses on the seizure list.
On the 26″ of January, 1968, I seized one application for the allotment of two-roomed and three roomed flats at Mohammadpur, an issue register and a show-cause notice after preparing a seizure list in the presence of search witnesses. The seizure list is already marked Ext. P.W. 50/1 and bears my signature. These were seized from the office of the Deputy Commissioner, Relief and Rehabilitation, Govt. of East Pakistan. This is the petition already marked Ext. P.W. 6/1. This register containing the entry marked already as Ext. P.W. 6/12 is the one that I seized then. The showcause notice already marked Ext. 6/2 was also seized by me on that occasion.
The seizure list already marked Ext. P.W. 73/1 was seized from the National Bank of Pakistan, Local Branch, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca. The documents shown here were seized from the National Bank of Pakistan, Local Branch, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca. This Ext. P.W. 73/6 pertains to the seizure of the documents from the National Bank of Pakistan. Ext. P.W. 73/5 pertains to documents that were seized from the National Bank of Pakistan, Local Branch, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca.
On the 2nd of February, 1968, I seized the S.B. Voucher and a short credit register from the National Bank of Pakistan, Local Branch, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca, in the presence of witnesses by preparing a seizure list which bears my signature and the signatures of the witnesses as well. This seizure list is already marked Ext. P.W. 26/2. This S.B. Vouchers already marked Ext. P.W. 26/5 is the one that was seized by me on that occasion. I put my signatures and also contained the signatures of the search witnesses on this document.
On the 4th of February, 1968, I seized a Tenancy Agreement from Mr. M.U. Ahmed, 99, Peelkhana Road, after preparing a seizure list
Page: 492
already marked as Ext. P.W. 100/2 in the presence of the search witnesses. The seizure list was signed by me and also by the search witnesses. I obtained the signatures of the search witnesses on the document. The Tenancy Agreement already Marked as Ext. P.W. 100/1 is the one that was seized by me then.
On 5th February, 1968 I seized one bearer cheque and an account opening form from the National Bank of Pakistan, Local branch, Jinnah Avenue, Dacca by preparing a seizure list already marked Ext. P.W. 74/1 in the presence of witnesses. I signed the seizure list and obtained the signatures of the search witnesses on it. This is the cheque already marked P.W. 15/7 and the account opening form already marked Ext. P.W. 15/9 that were seized by me on that occasion. I obtained the signatures of the search witnesses on these documents as well.
On the first March, 1968 I seized one original telegram and another telegram from the office of the Deputy Controller of the Posts, Telegraphs and Telephones, Government of Pakistan, by preparing a seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.91/1 in the presence of witnesses. I signed the seizure list and obtained signatures of search witnesses on it. The documents seized on that occasion are already marked Exts. P.W. 91/2 and P.W. 4/2 on both these documents I obtained signatures of the search witnesses. I also signed them.
On 4h March, 1968 I seized one original telegram from the office of the Deputy Controller Posts, Telegraphs and Telephones, Government of Pakistan, Dacca after preparing a seizure list in the presence of witnesses. The seizure list is now marked Ext. P.W. 223/2 and the telegram seized at that time are now marked Ext. P.W. 223/3. I obtained the signatures of the search witnesses on the telegram and I also signed it myself.
On the 19th March, 1968 I seized one bill register by preparing a seizure list already marked Ext. P.W. 54/1 in the presence of witnesses from the Green View, Filling and Servicing Station, Mirpur Road, Dhanmondi, Dacca. This bears my signatures as well as of the search witnesses. This is the register already marked Ext. P.W. 54/2 which I
Page: 493
seized on that occasion. The register was signed by the search witnesses and also by me.
On 19th March, 1968 I seized a rent bill book already marked P.W. 77/2 by preparing a seizure list already marked P.W. 77/1 from the possession of Mr. Reza Rabbani of Laboratory Road, in the presence of witnesses. I signed the seizure list and obtained signatures of the search witnesses. I obtained signatures of the search witnesses on the cover of this rent bill book. I also signed it myself.
On the 2nd April, 1968 I seized one certificate given by Mr. K. U. Ahmed from the possession of Nowab Ali. This is the certificate already marked Ext. P.W. 85/2 which I seized then. I obtained the signatures of the search witnesses on these documents and I also signed it myself.
On the 3rd April, 1968 I seized one jeep No. Dacca-Kha-9139 from the Deputy Chief Manager, Eastern Banking Corporation, Motijheel and one Blue book for the said Jeep by preparing a seizure list already marked Ext. P.W. 68/1 in the presence of witnesses. I signed that seizure list and obtained signatures of search witnesses thereon. I see here the Blue book now marked Ext. P.W. 223/4.
On the 4″ April, 1968 I seized one agreement of lease from the possession of one Mr. Md. Siddique of Tajmohal Road, Tejgoan, husband of Mrs. Khurshida Begun by preparing a seizure list already marked Ext. P.W. 95/2 in presence of witnesses. I signed the seizure list and obtained the signatures of the search witnesses thereon. This is the document already marked Ext. P.W.95/1. I obtained the signatures of the search witnesses on this document and I signed it myself.
On the 20th April, 1968 I seized one Friend’s bound book from the possession of Mr. Mukul Chandra Datta, Photographer of 193, Motijheel and prepared a seizure list already marked Ext. P.W. 94/1 in the presence of witnesses. I signed the seizure list myself and obtained the signatures of the search ……. …… PW223 (partial) documents missing
Page: 494
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
9.12.1968 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused Present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W. 223, MR. ABDUS SAMAD TALUKDAR CONTINUED TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I did not arrest any of the accused persons in this case. I had been investigating the case u/s 169 B of the Criminal Procedure Code. I cannot say if any of the persons now accused were produced before a Magistrate. Mr. Khaleque S.P. was the head of the Investigating Team in this case. We the investigating officers submitted our original diaries to the Court D.S.P. after completion of the investigation. I know that within 24 hours of the arrest of a person he has to be produced before a Magistrate. I recorded some of the statements of the persons I examined in Bengali and others in English. The following persons were examined in English:
Page: 495
(1) Mr. Ruhul Quddus, C.S.P. (2) A. K. M. Zahurul Hauqe (3) Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah (4) Mr. Harunur Rashid Khan (5) Mr. M. U. Ahmed (6) Mr. A. B. M. Yusuf (7) Mr. Omar Fateh Khan (8) Mr. Makhanlal Ghose (9) Mr. M. M. Sayeed (10) Lt. Mozammal Hossain and (11) Dr. S. M. Rab. The others were examined in Bengali. I do not know how to write Urdu. I had received no instructions to examine these persons in English. These persons volunteered to give their statements in English. A. B. M. Yusuf also spoke in English and he could speak well. I did not ask them why they were making their statements in English. It is not correct that Makhanlal Ghose was not in a position to make a statement in English in the language in which I have recorded his statement. I did not ascertain from them if any one of them was under arrest, when they were arrested and by whom some of them were examined in the Cantt. area and others at their respective places.
I examined the following accused persons in the Cantt. area:
(1) Mr. Ruhul Quddus, C.S.P. (2) Corpl. A. B. M. A. Samad (3) A. K. M. Zahural Huq (4) Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah (5) A. K. M. Tajul Islam (6) Capt. Mutalib (7) A. B. M. Yusuf and (8) Lt. Mozammel Hossain. I was directed to go to the Cantt. and examine them but not in writing. My S.P. told me that they were in the Cantt. We came in our jeep and I contacted Major Naser on arriving here. I examined these persons at different places in the Cantt. I did not see any notes with these persons when they made their statements before me. I did not show any earlier statements to any of the persons I examined. The S.P. and D.S.P. had given me instructions as to what points I should examine these persons on.
I examined Lt. Mozammel Hossain on 15.4.1968. I examined him twice the second examination is on 9.5.1968. Some points had been left out in the first examination and I was directed to examine again. To my knowledge, there was no earlier examination of Lt. Mozammel Hossain prior to 15.4.1968. When I examined Lt. Mozammel Hossain I was not aware that he had already been examined by a Magistrate. I was not told before I came and examined him on the two occasions that I have mentioned that he had already made a statement before a Magistrate. After examination of Lt. Mozammal Hossain I did not send him to any
Page: 496
Magistrate for recording his statement. In other cases we would send the person who makes a confessional statement before us to a Magistrate for recording his statement. (The witness adds that this they do generally). In this case I did not send any one up to the Magistrate even if he made a confession because I had only instructions to record his statement. It is not necessary that a statement before a police officer should precede a statement before a Magistrate. It is not correct that the object of our examining these persons was to make them incriminate other persons who had not been named earlier. I find that Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah was not named at all by Lt. Mazammel Hossain in his first statement before me. It is not correct however, to say that I went to record the second statement of Lt., Mozammel Hossain, only to implicate Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah. Upto now I have not seen the statement made by Lt. Mozammel Hossain before a Magistrate. We generally do secure copies of statements made before the Magistrate by accused or witnesses for the purpose of our investigation. Copy of such statement is kept in the case diary. No such copy of the statement of Lt. Mozammel Hossain is in my case diary because I was not aware of any such statement in his case. It is not correct that the statements in English that I recorded were not made by the persons concerned but they were given to me in writing and I put them into the diary.
I have described Dr. S. M. Rab whom I examined as an Associate Professor of Medicine, Sir Salimullah Medical College, resident of 180-A, Road No. 20, Satmasjid Road, Dhanmandi. It is not correct that I took this address from an old telephone directory. I did not know that he was a Professor of Dacca Medical College Hospital at the time when I examined him. I examined him in his Chamber in Jinnah Avenue. It is not correct that I asked certain of the persons whom I examined only personal questions without examining them about the facts of the case. It is also not correct that the statements as recorded in the diary of those persons were taken down from drafts already prepared. …. PW223 (partial) documents missing …. join the Team as he was not well.
I did not know when I joined the Team that there had been a military investigation in the case by the military authorities. Nor did I know that
Page: 497
the Central Investigation Department of the I.S.I. had anything to do with the investigation in this case. I know Mr. Rizvi Director-General, Central Intelligence and the Deputy Director, Mr. A. Safdar posted in Dacca. I do not know if any one of them had supervised the Investigation. I do not know if Col. Sher Ali Baz conducted the military investigation in this case from the military side. I followed the procedure of the Cr. Procedure Code in this case. I saw in the newspaper that some allegations were made by the defence on behalf of the detenues that they were tortured by the military authorities. It is not a fact that I have not mentioned any investigation by the military authorities in order to prevent them from being examined in this case. It is not correct that we were being controlled by the military authorities and that we were being supervised by them. I cannot remember now if I saw the press-communique of which a copy here is marked as Ext. DB-1/1.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I received my authority letter of becoming an Investigator in this case from the I.G.’S office. I was at that time posted in Munshiganj subdivision. I was asked on the telephone to come over to Dacca for the purpose of this investigation. I cannot remember the date but that was in January, 1968 most probably. I went to the I.G’s office on arrival here and met Mr. Majid. Mr. Majid informed me that I had been appointed as one of the investigators in this case. Later on, I had met Mr. Majid once or twice concerning this case. This was perhaps on the next day of my coming here. I closed my own diary on the 20h May, 1968. I examined all the witnesses in this case under section 161 Cr.P.C.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 498
CORRECTION
9.12.1968.
P.W. 223, Abdus Samad Talukder has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
On page 1261 in the 14th line, the word ‘Controller’ should be replaced by ‘Comptroller’.
The same correction is in the 5th line from the bottom of that page.
On page 1267 in the last line before the word ‘Diaries’ the word ‘Original’ should be inserted and after the word D.S.P.’ the words ‘ after completion of the investigation should be added.
On page 1273 in the sixth line from the bottom, the name ‘Moazzem’ should be replaced by ‘mazallail’.
On page 1275 in the 7th line from the top instead of ‘Sattar’ it should be ‘Safdar.
The rest of the statement is correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 499
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 224, MR. A. KHALEQUE ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A. Khaleque, son of late Mvi. Abdur Rashid, aged 57 years. I am a Special Supdt. of Police, Special Branch, Dacca.
TO MR. MANZUR QADIR
The letter was shown to me which is now marked as Ext. P.W, 224/1, I was authorised by the order of Mr. M. H. Khan, Addl. District Magistrate, Dacca, to take over the investigation of this case in place of Mr. M. A. Majid on 31.1.68. My function was to lead the Investigation Team and supervise them. I recorded no statements nor did I make any recoveries myself. I assumed the charge of this case on 2.2.68 from Mr. A. Majid and continued till 23.5.68. I see here the office copy of my letter which I submitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca, requesting him to depute a Magistrate for recording the statements of some arrested persons under section 164 Cr.P.C. in this case. (The document is now marked as Ext. P.W. 224/2.) Mr. G. M. Qadri Addl. District Magistrate, was accordingly deputed by the Deputy Commissioner to do this work.
I see here the office copy of a letter dated 15.6.68 which I submitted to the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca requesting that a Magistrate may be deputed for holding T.I. parades. (This document is now marked Ext. P.W.224/3.) The District Magistrate accordingly deputed Mr. A. Q. Chowdhury, Magistrate for holding T.I. parades. I see here the office copy of my report to the Deputy Commissioner already marked Ext. P.W.169/46 requesting that a Magistrate may be deputed to take the specimen writings of the persons named in this
Page: 500
document. Mr. Afsaruddin, Magistrate was accordingly deputed by the District Magistrate for this purpose. I see here also the office copy of my report to the District Magistrate, Dacca now marked Ext. P.W. 224/4 requesting him to tender pardon under section 337 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the persons named therein. Accordingly, the District Magistrate deputed Mr. M. S. Khan, Additional District Magistrate to tender pardon to these persons and those persons were produced before the Additional District Magistrate. I sent certain recovery documents along with specimen handwriting to two Handwriting Experts for comparison and for their opinion. I see here the office copy of my letter to the District Magistrate, Dacca, Submitting my completion report in this case in respect of investigation authorised under section 196B of the Code or Criminal Procedure. (This is now marked Ext. P.W.22475,). I see here the office copy of my letter to the Deputy Commissioner, Dacca dated 21.5.68 now marked Ext. P.W.22476 requesting that a Magistrate may be deputed to take further specimen handwriting of Amir Hossain in this case. Accordingly, the District Magistrate deputed Mr. A. Q. Chowdhury, a Magistrate for this purpose. On the basis of the request made to me by the Prosecution Counsel in this case I sent for certain information from certain Newspaper Editors and also made a request to handwriting experts to compare certain writings and give their opinion. I sent the reports from two Handwriting Experts to the Court in this case.
Note: The prosecution wants to put in evidence certain newspaper reports and intends to offer them as evidence of the facts stated in them. They relied on interalia on sections 32 and 11 of Evidence Act for this purpose. The learned counsel for the defence objects that this evidence is not at all admissible under any provision of the Evidence Act. The evidence sought to be led will be allowed to come on record subject to that objection and it will only be considered finally if the prosecution satisfies the Court about its admissibility after full argument from both sides at a later stage.
Page: 501
TO MR. MANZUR QADIR
These are 11 copies of newspapers which I have obtained from the Special Branch office as well as from the office of the Intelligence Bureau, Dacca. These newspapers are Pakistan Observer, Morning News, Azad, Ittafaq, Sangbad, Dawn and Jang (These are now marked Ext. P.W.224/7-17.) This is a correct copy of the translation of a report in Ext. P.W.224/9 of the Daily Sangbad now marked Ext. P.W.224/18. This is a correct translation of a news item published in the daily AZAD which is already marked Ext. P.W.224/10. (The translation is now marked Ext. P.W.224/19.) I see here a correct translation of news items published in the Daily Ittefaq already marked Ext. P.W.224/6. (The translation is now marked Ext. P.W.224/20.) I made correspondence with the editors and managers of the newspapers which I have just now exhibited requesting them to let me know the names of the correspondents and staff reporters on the basis of whose information the news items marked in these papers were published. The reply that I received from them stated that it was not possible to supply the names of such reporters as the news was very old. The replies obtained by me in this connection are now marked Ext. P.W.224/21 to P.W.224/33. I could not find out the names of these reporters from these newspaper offices. I could not take any other steps to trace them. The news items published in the newspapers and marked were enquired into by me with reference to other papers. I could not find any contradiction to them.
CROSS-EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The newspapers exhibited by me bear the dates of the publication. The newspapers exhibited by me are from the year 1964 to 1967. I collected these newspapers this year from February to May. The reporters of these newspapers I have exhibited are paid by the Publication Company concerned. I did not visit the office of any of these ‘newspapers. I made correspondence with them. I did not enquire from them to find out as to who were the reporters in 1967 or in any other year on the basis of their records from 1964 to 1967. I do not know whether
Page: 502
these newspapers offices maintain books of accounts and acquaintance rolls of their staff for their own purpose as well as for submitting them to the Income Tax authorities. I have not read any news in any newspaper regarding the illness or the death of the mother of the accused Azizul Huq. I did not read any news in the Daily ‘Sangbad’ to the effect that the accused Azizul Huq has been released on parole after the death of his mother. I did not see any report in the newspaper to the effect that Mr. Hamidul Huq Chowdhury was present in this Court on behalf of this case. I had nothing to do with the issue of the Press Note dated the 6th January, 1968 as I was not associated with the case at that time. I took charge of the case only on the 2nd of February, 1968. On taking charge I got myself acquainted with the progress of the investigation of the case so far made. This Press Note already marked Ext. DB-1/1 was not brought to my notice. I do not agree that the investigation was nearly completed on the day I took over the charge of this case. This statement to the effect that most of the accused had confessed in this Press Note was not my concerned and I do not know whether it was correct. On the 2nd of February, I did not get any copy of any statement of any of the accused persons made to a Magistrate. I got two statements made to the police by Amir Hossain and Abu Shams Lutful Huda and no other statements. I do not know whether there was any investigation made at all in this case prior to my coming to this case as I was not here and I was not also subsequently told about it. As far as my knowledge goes the accused persons were taken to the custody of the Army authorities on 18.1.68 that ended the custody under the B.P.R. when the Army took them over. I do not know under what law they were taken over by the Army. On the 2nd I got the two Police statements which I have already mentioned, of Amir Hossain and Abu Shams Lutful Huda and also the documents recovered from the suspects’ premises. I did not enquire from the Army authorities as to what investigations were made by them. I do not know what the Army people did and whether they retired from the investigation after my taking up the investigation as I was not concerned with them. I did not see the Army officers at Rajarbagh Police office at any time. I did not consult the Army Act at any time. I did not enquire
Page: 503
under what section the Army officers operated. I did not see the Army officers anywhere in connection with this case. I had no occasion to consult the Army Law or as it is called the Services Law. The enquiry that I conducted was also against the Army personnel involved in this Case. Even with regard to them I did not consult the Services Law but I called for their service records. I did not submit any charge sheet to anybody. I do not know whether anybody has submitted charge-sheet in this case.
No. F.I.R. was recorded in this case. Nor any complaint was filed in this case earlier. My investigation was progressing on the basis of the 2 statements obtained from the two persons as mentioned by me earlier as well as the documents recovered from the premises of the suspects. Those two persons were under arrest. I did not meet anyone of them personally. In connection with this case, I came to the cantonment several times. I conducted an investigation under the Code of Criminal Procedure. I did not produce any of the accused people before a Magistrate after I took over the investigation. I am aware of the law that after arrest an accused is to be presented before a Magistrate within 24 hours of his arrest.
I do not think it necessary to examine a person before producing him to a Magistrate for recording his confessional statement. Generally, it is the practice that when a statement is to be recorded under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of a witness or an accused, then he has to be forwarded by the police to the Magistrate with a letter of request. In this case, as the accused persons or the witnesses were in the custody of the Army authorities as such whenever they informed me that any one of them was willing to make statement. I requested them to produce such persons before the Magistrate on my behalf; there was no forwarding letter for their appearance on my behalf. The accused persons were produced by the Military Authorities at my request on my behalf before the Magistrate. The Military officer to whom I communicated my request was to Major Naser who was in charge of the suspects. On receiving intimation from the Military authorities. I did not send any members of my investigating team to enquire and find out as to who were the persons
Page: 504
who wanted to make statements and on what points they wanted to make such statements. I obtained copies of such statements after the recording of them by the Magistrate from Col. Sher Ali Baz at a later stage. Col. Sher Ali Baz was in charge of the Army team and was looking after the service personnel involved in this case. After I was put in charge of this case I had no objection to the Army officers’ investigating this case. When I obtained copies of the statements from Col. Sher Ali Baz I did not ask for previous statements if any obtained by the Army Authorities from the suspects or any copy of the seizure lists etc. The officers of my team were sent by me to examine specific persons assigned to each. This I did from time to time. I do not remember on which date I asked which officer to examine accused person or witness. I did not keep any record of these directions. This I did not the bias of the statements received by me in course of investigation. I had discussion with my team about the investigation. I was not aware whether any Army officer visited the interrogation Centre at Rajarbagh or not. I sit in the same building in which Mr. Majid does. Mr. Majid’s Office is located on the first floor and my office is located on the second floor of the same building. Mr. Majid was in charge of this case before me. When I took over the case from him I went through the records. I did not see any record prepared by Mr. Majid. I remember the name of one of the accused to be Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah. I did nothing with regard to him. I only gave a direction to examine all the accused persons including Flt. Sgt. Mafizullah.
Page: 505
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
10.12.1968 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT Mr. Justice S. A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman Mr. Justice M. R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-u-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused on oath: As before.
CROSS EXAMINATION OF P.W.224, MR. A. KHALEQUE CONTINUED TO COURT
The enquiries which I made from the newspaper office were made by me as head of the investigation team.
NOTE: The question of admissibility of the replies sent by the newspaper offices is left open for an argument along with the question of admissibility of the newspapers reports themselves.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I do not know the dates of the arrest of the accused persons in this case.
TO COURT
All the accused were under arrest before I took charge of the investigation
Page: 506
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I do not know when Capt. Nuruzzaman was arrested. I do not know if Capt. Nuruzzaman was arrested after I had submitted my completion report. Nor do I know if several of the accused were arrested after I took charge of the investigation. I did not suggest the arrest of any one as a result of our investigation. We never produced any of the accused persons before a Magistrate. Some of the accused were non-military personnel. I did not know if the ministry of Home Affairs issued a press note on the 18th January, 1968 to the effect that these persons had been arrested under the Army, Navy and Air Force Acts. After I submitted a completion report in my investigation there was no further investigation of this case by us. None of my officers interrogated any accused or witness at the Rajarbagh interrogation centre. By “My officers” I mean the members of my investigation team. No signatures of any accused were taken by us. Ext. P.W.224/5 is the only report which I submitted as a result of the investigation. I have not mentioned in this report the nature of the evidence existing again at each accused. I mentioned in this report that there was a list attached to the accused persons. That list must be with the Deputy Commissioner. I do not know whether I am entitled to investigate any offence under the Army Acts. So far as our investigation goes we were investigating under the Code of Criminal Procedure in respect of offences under the Penal Code. I cannot say now who the persons under arrest were at the time I submitted my completion report in this case. I did not mention any person who in my investigation had been exonerated in my report.
NOTE: The prosecution has been directed to produce the original report along with the annexure containing the names of the accused from the Deputy Commissioner’s office.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
I do not know if any suspects were released in this case after the submission of my completion report. I had gone to Rawalpindi along with the I.G. Police in the month of March, 1968 only once. I discussed
Page: 507
with the Army officers there about the Army personnel involved in this case. I got no investigation report from the Army officers at that time. I do not know if any person was examined by a Magistrate in Rawalpindi. From Rawalpindi, we went to Karachi. I had gone to Karachi for the purpose of an investigation of this case. I had asked the Navy and Air Force authorities to make available to us the service records of the accused under their jurisdictions. I also requested the S.P. Special Branch, Karachi to assist us in this matter and also in respect of other enquiries if necessary. The other enquiries were about the verification of movement of the suspects. I did not get any reports about these other enquiries concerning the movements of the suspects. I did not make any complaint to the I.G. Police that we were not being taken into confidence by the military authorities. I never met Lt. Sharif but only heard his name. I never saw the face of any of the accused persons. I did not see any such incident as is being alleged that a Military Officer crossed over a small wall and assaulted Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain. As far as I can remember, one of the persons now a witness, in this case, was examined by another Magistrate of Dacca beside Mr. Quadri. I do not remember if one or more than one person was examined by that Magistrate. I do not know if Kamaluddin Ahmed was produced for his statement before a Magistrate. I do not know if any persons were examined by the military and notes were taken by them about this case. It is not correct that we are suppressing the part played by the military in the investigation or that the statements earlier recorded by the military are being suppressed. I am not aware of any statements recorded earlier then the investigation by the civil police.
The service records were probably received by us in the month of May. My D.S.P. received them from the Military headquarters in Dacca. I do not know if the military who might have been investigating in this case ever submitted any report to the Deputy Commissioner or any other authority. I kept no diary of my own for this case. I did not keep a personal diary of cases. Again said I did maintain a case diary in this case. I had not seen the complaint before it was submitted to this Court. I was not consulted in the matter of preparation of the complaint.
Page: 508
TO MR. KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
I also never saw the face of any witness in this case. The case diaries were submitted by my subordinates to me. I perused those diaries from day to day. As a result of our investigation, I exonerated nobody. No names of suspects were supplied to us when we were asked to investigate.
TO KHAN BAHADUR NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
It was my own idea to enquire from the newspapers’ organization and no one suggested it to me. I sent to investigate the possibility of some corroboration being provided for the witnesses’ statements by this means. I did not examine the writers of the letters which I received from the newspaper’s office.
TO MR. ABDULLAH
It is not a fact that the Military got up this case and the Police were directed to fabricate evidence to support that. I belong to Noakhali district. I joined the police Department as Sub-Inspector of Police in 1936. I became a member of the P.S.P. in 1952. This was an ad-hoc appointment on selection by the Public Service Commission. Generally in the district, instructions are issued by the superior officers in writing to the sub-ordinates but here I issued over all instructions because my subordinates were in the same office.
TO MR. T.H. KHAN IN RE-EXAMINATION
I have collected the newspapers which I have produced in this Court, some before the submission of my collection report and some afterwards. (No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman
Member.
Member
Page: 509
DEPOSITION OF P.W.225, MR. AKHLAQUE HOSSAIN
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Akhlaque Hossain, son of Dilruba Hossain, aged 32 years, by faith Muslim, at present Establishment In-charge, Traffic, PIA, Karachi.
I am Establishment In-charge, Traffic, PIA, Karachi, I see here a Passenger Manifest of 28th August and 29th August, 1965. These Manifests are prepared by PIA in the normal course of business. The copies which I see here are office copies. (They have now marked Ext. P.W.225/1. and P.W.225/2.) The original manifests go to the Accounts Department. I do not know what is done with them.
CROSS-EXAMINATION P.W. 225
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
These carbon copies have been brought from our record. I did not go to the Accounts Office to find out what had happened to the original manifest copies. We do not generally keep any Photostat copy of any manifest in our office. But since the Police had brought the office copies from our office we have kept the Photostat copies in our office of these manifests. The office copies were taken from our office sometime back by a Police Officer. At that time we retained Photostat copies. We made 2 sets of Photostat copies. We originally gave the Photostat copies to the Police but they required the office copies from us. Both the manifest copies are for the journey from Karachi to Dacca. For the journey from Dacca to Karachi, we do not have any manifest copy in our record. (We only received information about the journeys from Dacca to Karachi.) The manifest or the copies would be retained at Dacca for the journey
Page: 510
from Dacca to Karachi. The Police came to get the documents from us in 1968. These documents are kept in the record room in Karachi. The manifests are destroyed after six months or one year depending upon the rules of every office. In our office, there is no such rule for destruction. There is more than one steward in an International Flight in PIA. The PIA Flights were suspended for sometime during the war with India in 1965. The Captain is in-charge of the Plane during the flight. I do not know who the next below to him in rank is. I do not know how many people work in a PIA International Plane.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman
Member
Member
CORRECTION
10.12.1968.
P.W.225, Akhlaque Hossain has read over his statement to himself and now stats that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 511
DEPOSITION OF P.W.226, ABDUL HABIB ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Abdul Habib, son of late Karim Bax, aged 54 years, at present, I am the Officer-in-charge, Trade Division in the C.S.O. office, Karachi. Before that I was in the Publication Branch.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I have been in the Trade Branch from July, 1966. Besides other functions, I was in-charge of the Leave Register of my own staff when I was attached to the Publication Branch. Amir Hossain served under me at Karachi. I am familiar with the signature of Mr. Amir Hossain Mia. I recognize the signature of Amir Hossain Mia on the leave application now marked as Ext. P.W.226/1. This was a part of our record at Karachi. In this paper, there is my endorsement. He had prayed for casual leave and I signed the endorsement on it on 1.2.65 granting leave. I see here another casual leave application signed by Amir Hossain Mia now marked as Ext. P.W.226/2. This also bears my endorsement. I endorsed it “put up on return” and he joined on 26.2.65 and his leave was granted. My signature on it is dated 27.6.65. We received a telegram shown to me in this file now marked as Ext. P.W.226/3. This telegram was addressed to me. I see here in the file an application of Amir Hossain Mia which bears his signature. (It is now marked as Ext. P.W.226/4). This was in respect of his T.A. on transfer. I forwarded this to the Administration under my signature dated 15.1.66. I see here the casual leave register. It was maintained in my office in the usual course of business (The register is already marked as Ext. P.W.214/1).
Page: 512
In this register marked Ext. P.W.214/1 I see on page No.1 leave account of Md. Amir Hossain Mia. (The page is now marked Ext. P.W.22675). The entries in this register have been made in the official course of business. I am familiar with the handwriting of Amir Hossain Mia. The petitions Ext. P.W.226/1 and P.W.226/2 are in the handwriting of Md. Amir Hossain Mia.
CROSS- EXAMINATION
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
The leave applications were not written in presence. If somebody wishes to leave the station then he has to take leave from the Director General of the C.S.O. in 1965. He left in November or December of that year. I cannot grant permission to leave the station. I never gave any permission to Amir Hossain Mia to leave Karachi. I cannot say whose handwriting is in this document marked Ext. P.W.181/1.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member.
CORRECTION
10.12.1968.
P.W.226, Abdul Habib has read over his statement to himself and now he states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded,
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 513
DEPOSITION OF P.W.227, MD. ANWARULLAH ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Anwarullah, s/o Mvi. Edabullah, aged 39 years, by faith Muslim, Office Assistant, Meteorological Department of Chittagong
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am an assistant in the Meteorological Office, Agrabad, Chittagong. Meteorological Office at Patenga is under our office. I have brought documents from our office regarding discrepancies in the observation of the storm by the observer. This report is in my hand and was given by me now marked Ext. P.W.227/1. I submitted this report to the Regional Director who is my boss. I submitted this on 16.5.67. This is an order passed by my Regional Director Abdul Kader Khan. I know his signature. (The document is now marked Ext. P.W.227/2). This is an order passed by the Regional Director and conveyed to Md. Fazlul Karim Mazumder through me now marked Ext. P.W.227/3. This was issued in due course of official business. I know the initials of the Regional Director in this letter. This is an office memo of the order issued by the Regional Director and served on Md. Fazlul Karim Mazumder which is now marked Ext. P.W.227/4.
CROSS- EXAMINATION
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I got intimation on last Friday to appear in this Tribunal. I was directed to come with official records. In the summons, it was not stated as to what documents I was required to bring. My Regional Director
Page: 514
asked me to bring these documents. This was on Friday last. When the observations are made by the observer then these are noted in the register. I have brought the register where the observer was to make entries and missed to do so. This is that register which was brought from my office. (The register is marked Ext. 227/5.) This register is maintained in our office in due course of official business. The mistake was not corrected after its detection in this register. The rule followed in our offices that if the mistake with regard to the natural phenomenon is not corrected within a period of six hours then the same is not corrected in this register. This rule is recorded in our Code Book. I have not noted anywhere that this correction was made because six hours had passed. I do not know the importance of the date 17.4.67 in connection with this case. My job is to supervise the observers and sometimes to record the entries in this register. Fazlul Karim Mazumder who was responsible for these discrepancies was subsequently discharged from the service because of this and other discrepancies I do not know when Fazlul Karim was discharged. The last time that I saw him was in April, 1967 at Barisal. I do not know whether Fazlul Karim Mazumder was discharged from service after the initiation of the Investigation in this case. It is not correct to say that I have been made to manufacture this report by the investigating agency. I make day to day supervision about the work of the observers. On the 17th April 1967 evening, there was a storm and I went to the office on the following morning and found that the observer had not recorded that in this register and after that I took steps.
The storm occurred on the 17″ April, 1967 at 6.45 P.M. East Pakistan time. The observer was required to make an entry of this storm at the time of its occurrence. I went for supervision on the 18th at 8 A.M. I did not go to supervise within six hours from the beginning of the storm as that did not fall within my duty hours. My duty hours began at 8 A.M. on the following morning and ended at 2 P.M. The observer can correct that mistake within six hours. At the time of the storm, I kept a record of it on a loose paper. After that when I brought it to the notice of the Regional Director, the Regional Director told me to keep him under observation for one month. The Regional Director had, in fact, told me on 12.5.67 to
Page: 515
keep him under observation. I did not report about him on the following morning because I was already instructed by the Regional Director to keep him under observation for one month and on the expiry of one month I reported against him with regard to these lapses and all the other mistakes during this period. On 17.4.67 I was posted at Barisal. That observer was also at Barisal at that time. All weather forecasts are given by the Patenga office at Chittagong. Warnings of all storms are declared by that office. I did not receive any warning for any storm from Patenga on that day.
TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
I have not preserved those loose papers on which I noted the discrepancy. I did not attach those loose papers with my report. With regard to the storm of this day, I kept it on a loose paper. With regard to the discrepancies of other days the facts were already recorded in the official registers. In this case on 17.4.68 no entry was made at all by Mr. Fazlul Karim Mazumder. With regard to the other discrepancies wrong entries were made. I was in Barisal up to 18th December, 1967. After that I have been transferred to Chittagong.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness further).
Chairman
Member.
Member
Page: 516
DEPOSITION OF P.W.228, MR. A. K. M. AHSANULLAH,
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is A. K. M. Ahsanullah, son of late Nazir Hossain Talukdar, aged 50 years, by faith Muslim, at present D.S.P. Special Branch, Dacca.
I am D.S.P. Special Branch, Dacca. I was detailed by the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Dacca to make preliminary investigation in this case on 8.1.68 by an order already marked Ext. P.W.219/1. At that time I was Inspector of Police, CID, Dacca. I took over the charge of this case on 10.1.68. I was promoted to the rank of Dy. Supdt. of police on 8.2.68. In the course of my investigation, I examined witnesses and seized certain documents. On 15.1.68 I seized an application form for bank draft from the National Bank of Pakistan, Jinnah Avenue by preparing a seizure list in presence of witnesses. This is the seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.26/1. This bears my signature. This is the application for the bank draft already marked Ext. P.W.3/44 which I seized at that time.
On 27.1.68 I seized three items of papers from Mr. Lutful Huda and prepared this seizure list in the presence of witnesses. The seizure list is already marked Ext. P.W.1576. It bears my signature. This negative already marked Ext. P.W.1575, this document already marked Ext. P.W.15/1 and the other documents already marked Ext. P.W.15/2 were seized by me on that occasion.
On 27.1.68 I seized a deed of agreement for hire of a house from the possession of Mr. Lutful Huda at 13, Green Square and prepared this
Page: 517
seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.15/4. It bears my signature and I seized the document in the presence of witnesses. This agreement already marked Ext. P.W.15/3 was seized at that time.
On 29.1.68 I seized some T.A. bills from Barisal IWTA Office in presence of witnesses by preparing a seizure list already marked Ext. P.W.146/1. It bears my signature. These bills already marked Exts. P.W.146/2 to 146/13 were the documents that were seized by me on that occasion.
On 11.6.68- seized one original deserter’s roll by preparing a seizure list in presence of witnesses from Major Naser now marked Ext. P.W.228/1. It bears my signature. The deserter’s roll is already marked 137/8 which I seized at that time.
I sent some documents including this negative already marked Ext. P.W.1575 to Mr. Maniruddin of the Central Intelligence Bureau for getting a Photostat copy prepared for this negative. This Photostat copy already marked Ext. P.W.204/1 was the one that was prepared by Mr. Maniruddin.
I examined some witnesses and some of the accused persons in this case on different dates. I sent some requisitions to the police officers outside Dacca for the seizure of some documents.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.228 TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
I have no knowledge of the investigation by the Military in this case. I was not aware of any investigation by the Military before I came on the scene. In my investigation or subsequently, I was not able to know of any investigation by the Military Authorities in this case. I know that a complaint had been filed in this case before this Tribunal by the Central Government. I have not read it. It is not correct to say that I have read that petition of the complaint and I am suppressing that fact because it mentioned some investigations by the Military Authorities. It the middle of May, 1968, I came to know that some of the accused persons and witnesses had made statements before a Magistrate. This information was given to me by my Superior Officer. I have not seen those
Page: 518
statements. Now says that I have seen those statements. I saw them probably on the 19th or the 20th of May, 1968. Some of my coinvestigators might have known this fact and some may not have known to. It is not a fact that there has been a discreet silence by all the investigating officers about the Military investigation in this case. It is not a fact that there is no conspiracy amongst the accused persons against the Central Govt. But that there has been some conspiracy amongst the accused to suppress the facts of military investigation in this case.
CONTRADICTIONS
The portions marked ‘A’ to ‘A’, ‘B’ to ‘B’, ‘C’ to ‘C’, ‘C’, ‘D’ to ‘D’ D, E’ to ‘E’ ‘F’, ‘F’ to ‘F’, ‘G’ to ‘G’, ‘H’ to ‘H’, ‘T’ to ‘T’ “‘J’ to ‘J’ ‘K’ to ‘K’, ‘L’ to ‘L’, M’ to ‘M’, ‘N’ to ‘N’ and ‘O’ to ‘O’ in this copy of the statement of the witness, Amir Hossain Mia correctly represent what he stated before me.
Page: 519
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
11.12.1968. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT Mr. Justice S. A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M. R. Khan, S.Pk. Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member. For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.228, MR. A. K. M. AHSANULLAH CONTINUED CONTRATICTIONS
The portion marked ‘A’ to ‘A’ in the copy of the statement of Abu Shams Lutful Huda correctly represents what he stated before me.
The portion marked ‘A’ to ‘A’ in the copy of the statement of Chowkidar Abdul Wahab correctly represents what he stated before me.
While recording the statements of the witnesses, I did not omit anything that they stated nor did I add anything of my own accord.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM KHAN
From 10.1.1968 to 19.1.1968 I was in-charge of the Investigation as the senior most investigation officer. After that Mr. Majid, first of all, took charge of me and then Mr. Khaleque, I however, remained associated with the investigation even after that I worked under Mr.
Page: 521
Majid for only 1 or 2 days. During those 1 or 2 days when I was under Mr. Majid, I only perused some records seized from different places. There was no conference of the Investigating Team during those 1 or 2 days. We did not arrest anybody and therefore I do not know if anybody was arrested in those 1 or 2 days. What I mean to say is that none of the Members of the Investigating Team arrested anybody in this case. I do not remember if I met Mr. Ruhul Quddus, and Mr. Fazlur Rahman, CSPs, who is now accused in this case. It is not correct that I took these two officers to the Govt. House before their arrest. I had no personal knowledge that these two officers were arrested under the D.P.R. I had come to know that they were placed under detention under the D.P.R. but I cannot remember when they were arrested. I never accompanied them to jail. I do not know who had escorted them to Banani. During those 1 or 2 days when Mr. Majid was in charge of the Investigation, I had no discussion with him promoted during the investigation of this case in order to persuade me to do whatever they wanted me to do.
It was on 19.1.68 when I first contacted Mr. Amir Hossain Mia. He was in the military custody in the Cantonment when I met him. I know that a bag was recovered from the C.S.O. Office, Dacca, at his instance. I do not know of any fruit basket belonging to Amir Hossain Mia was kept in the Dacca Central Jail from 14.12.67 up to 17.1.68. I did not meet Amir Hossain Mia while he was in Jail. I met him the second time also, while he was in the Army Headquarters in Dacca Cantonment. I did so of my own without any instruction from anyone. I do not know if before I met Amir Hossain Mia, any statement of him had been recorded by the Police. I had recorded his statement on 19.1.68 and again on 8.5.68. Nobody had asked me to examine him twice. The second time I went to him for investigation and with no other specific purpose as I wanted certain clarifications regarding some documents from him. This fact has been noted in my diary. I was with him on 19.1.68 from 8-30 A.M. to 3 P.M. I was not aware then of any earlier statement made by him. On the second occasion, I was with him from 8-30 a.m. to 2 P.M. I did not know if Amir Hosain Mia was examined by a Magistrate at any time. I saw the statement of Amir Hossain Mia before the Magistrate on the table of my senior officer Mr.
Page: 522
Khaleque on the 20th May, 68. Among other papers lying on the table of Mr. Khaleque I found the statements of Amir Hossain Mia. I cannot remember now whether this statement was kept separately on the table from other papers. It was just by chance that I happened to see it lying on the table. I do not remember if out of the other witnesses I examined, anyone had made statement before Magistrate. I had examined Abu Shams Lutful Huda. I do not know if he had already made a statement before a Magistrate. I had examined Lutful Huda on 27.1.68. I have been associated with this case until now. I do not know if the military had also been an investigation in this case. I do not know if Amir Hossain Mia was also interrogated at the Rajarbagh Centre. I saw no note of any such interrogation. Mr. Mannaf of Special Branch in the same building in which I do.
I do not know if photographs of the accused persons had been taken. Apart from submitting my case diary to my superior officer, I had not submitted other reports. As a result of our investigation, I do not know who was going to be made accused in the case and who was going to be released. On these points no discussion took place among the investigating officers. It is not known to me who ultimately decided as to who would be made accused in the case.
I could have myself taken hold of the negative from the photographic studio which I took from Lutful Huda.
TO COURT
I had asked Lutful Huda to get the negative from the photographer. I did not go to get negative because he volunteered to produce it.
TO MR. ABDUS SALAM. KHAN
He produced the negative on the very day that I had examined him. I had visited Feni but I did not personally seize any documents from there. A Sub-Inspector of Police had seized several documents from there. He did so on my requisition. I was staying in the Police Club Feni when I went there. While I was there in the Police Club, I directed the Police Inspector to seize the documents at Feni. That officer handed over the seized documents to me on 7.2.68. The documents he handed over to me
Page: 523
were the register of Hotel Denofa and the register of the Dak Bungalow at Feni. I examined the Denofa Hotel register on the day that it was brought to me. I do not remember if when I examined the Denofa Hotel register, I saw any overwriting therein or not. I had not noted any such fact in my diary. (The witness was handed over the register of the Hotel Denofa already marked Ext. P.W.59/1 and asked to look at the entry marked Ext. P.W.59/2 in the register and to say whether in this entry there is overwriting). The witness says that in this entry there are some over writings. This overwriting is in the column meant for the date of leaving the hotel. The date immediately above this entry is 10.7.67. I had examined the Dak Bungalow Register but found no materials useful therein. I do not remember if I had given direction for the seizure of the Dak Bungalow Register particularly. I did not send any search warrant for the seizure of this register from the Dak Bungalow. I had only sent requisition in writing to the Sub-Inspector of Police at Feni for the seizure of this document. I do not remember whether I specified any document to be seized in that requisition. I do not remember the name of the Sub-Inspector to whom I sent the requisition. I had sent the requisition to the O.C., Feni Police Station. There is no note in my diary showing the nature of the requisition which I sent. I now find that in my diary I have not noted the fact of sending the requisition at all. I do not remember if I met that police officer who brought the documents to me earlier than when he brought the documents to me in the police Club. (Earlier the witness had said- I did not meet him prior to that occasion). I examined some witnesses at Feni in the Police Club. I examined Ruhul Amin, Manager of Hotel Denofa and Abdul Wahab Chowkidar of the Feni Dak Bungalow after the documents had been brought to me. I had not asked these witnesses to come to Dacca for attending any T.I. parade. It is not a fact that witness Ruhul Amin was called to the police station with the register of the hotel. I cannot remember which other police officers I met while I was staying at the Feni Police Club.
I did issue requisition for the search of the house of Mr. Ahmed Fazlur Rahman, C.S.P. accused in this case for recovery of any arms, if possible. This was the only requisition I gave to the Lalbagh P.S. in
Page: 524
respect of Mr. A. F. Rahman. I had directed the officer to obtain a search warrant from a Magistrate for this purpose. I do not remember whether any such search warrant was actually obtained from any Magistrate. I do not remember having consulted any diary belonging to Mr. A. F. Rahman, accused. I did not take any specimen writing of any accused in this case. It is not correct that I was present when some of the accused were called upon to write down a letter in the presence of Lt. Sharif and Lt. Shamim. It is not a fact that I took any typed statement of Capt. Alim accused of the office of Major Hasan. I do not know if anybody reported against me to the G.O.C. at any time. I did examine some of the accused persons in this case but I did not ask them when they were arrested and by whom. It is not a fact that the investigation conducted by me and the other officers in the Investigation Team was done at the dictation of the military officers in accordance with their wishes. I do not know of the earlier statements made by the accused persons or the witnesses at all and there for the question of suppressing them does not arise.
TO MR. ISMAIL
I did not question Amir Hossain Mia when I first examined him whether he had been examined earlier or not. I did not try to find out during my investigation whether he had been examined earlier or not. I never asked Mr. Mannaf whether he had examined Amir Hossain Mia earlier. I did not come to know during my investigation that Mr. Mannaf had examined him earlier and had actually recorded his statement. It is not a fact that Amir Hossain Mia implicated in his statement Mr. Ruhul Quddus, accused with my active support falsely. It is not a fact that he was made an accused in this case because he refused to make a statement at the instance of Col. Sher Ali Baz.
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
I do not know of the arrest of any accused in this case after the submission of the completion report of the Investigation Team by Mr. Khaleque. I do not know if Mr. Ali Reza accused was taken for interrogation at Rajarbagh Interrogation Centre.
Page: 525
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
Capt. Najmul Huda so far as I know is originally from Faridpur. Their family is settled down in Barisal. There is a Bogra Road in Barisal. That may be only two furlongs from Borga Road. The road on which I live branch of from Bogra road. My house is by the side of that of Mr. K. N. Huda, brother of Mr. Najmul Huda, accused. I did not meet any member of the family of Capt. Najmul Huda after I had taken over the investigation of this case.
I did not call any of the relations of Capt. Huda to my office at Dacca. I do not remember whether I ever met him when he was in military custody, it is not a fact that on the 15th of April, 1968, I accompanied by Lt. Sharif, visited Capt. Huda when he was in military custody. It is not a fact that at that time I threatened him saying that he should not retract from his confession as all the accused persons were retracting from their confessions and the case would be in jeopardy. It is also not a fact that I gave inducement at that time saying that if he sticks to his confession, then I tried to make him stick to his extorted confession through his relations. None of my sons studies in any Cadet College.
I met Abu Shams Lutful Huda only on one occasion. That was when I recorded his statement. I recorded his statement at 13, Green Square, Dacca, on 27.1.68. I do not know whether any other Police officer of my Investigating Team met Abu Shams Lutful Huda before 27.1.68. I examined him on my own. Nobody suggested to me to do that. Before examining Lutful Huda I did not enquire from my S.P. as to whether any other Police officer had already examined him. I know Malibagh. My S.B. office is located in Malibagh. I do not know whether Abu Shams Lutful Huda ever shifted to a house at Malibagh or not. He never came and informed me that he had shifted from 13, Green Square to Malibagh. After recording his statement I never visited him not even for enquiring about his welfare or health. I do not know where Abu Shams Lutful Huda is residing now. I never knew that he had shifted from 13, Green Square. It is not known to me whether Abu Shams Lutful Huda was under surveillance of the Police in Malibagh. It is not a fact that he was brought to Malibagh from 13, Green Square in order to keep him under Police surveillance. It is not a fact that I
Page: 526
never recorded his statement at 13, Green Square. It is not correct to say that I altered his statement frequently in order to bring it in line with the statements of others and for that purpose, I had communicated within. It is also not correct that besides persuasion I also threatened him to change his statement from time to time. It is not also correct that besides persuasion I also threatened him to change his statement from time to time. It is not also true that I finally recorded his statement after several interrogations on 27.1.68.
I visited the Headquarters, 14-Division, only for the purpose of investigation. It is not correct that I had been visiting there very frequently. It is not correct to say that whenever I visited the Headquarters 14-Division, I was accompanied by Lt. Sharif, Major Naser and Md. Israil. It is not correct that I was always dittoing what the military authorities were telling me. Sometimes I along with other co-investigators used to meet in a conference with our S.P. to discuss the progress of the investigation. The co-ordination used to be decided at that time.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
I did not meet Manik Choudhury or Bidhan Sen accused in this case in the course of my investigation. I do not remember whether any of my coinvestigators met and contacted Manik Chowdhury or Bidhan Sen. Their names, however, came to my knowledge. I do not remember the date when I came to know their names first. I did not go to Chittagong ever in connection with this case. I cannot remember whether the names of Manik Choudhury or Bidhan Sen came to my knowledge after my visit to Feni or before. I do not remember when I met Mr. Khaleque last in connection with the investigation of this case. I do not remember when we had our last conference with Mr. Khaleque in connection with this case.
TO MR. ABDULLAH
It did not occur to me during the investigation that I could get some useful information from the military authorities. I did not meet Capt. Shawkat Ali Mia at all in the 14-Division Mess. Nor did I meet him elsewhere in the Cantonment. I do not remember when I first met Major
Page: 527
Hasan in connection with this case. On 1.5.68, I did not come to the Cantonment. It is not a fact that I did visit the Cantonment on 1.3.68 and visited Major Hasan in the Officer’s Mess of 14-Division and found him giving dictation to Capt. Shawkat Ali Mia, and then Major Hasan introduced him to me. It is not correct to say that on 15.4.68 I visited Capt. Shawkat Ali Mia and Capt. Alim in the company of Major Hasan and Major Hasan told them that shortly, D.SP. Mr. Ahsanuallah and Major Hasan would give a rehearsal of cross-examination that they would have to face in Court.
TO MR. SYED NURUL ISLAM
It is not the fact that during the investigation I was asked to procure some witnesses in this case only. I did not take Amir Hossain Mia or Abu Shams Lutful Huda to the Magistrate for recording their statements. It is not a fact that I used to get instructions from Major Hasan and used to act accordingly. It is not correct that once Major Hasan shouted at me and Inspector Lodhi and that I reported this matter to my I.G. and he reported this matter to the G.O.C. through the Home Secretary of the Govt. of East Pakistan. It is not a fact that all the statements were recorded in presence of Major Hasan.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness). Further examination with leave of the Court.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I obtained this search warrant from the S.D.O. Barisal for the seizure of the T.A. Bills of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain from the IWTA Office. (This search warrant is now marked Ext. P.W.228/2.) This is the application that I filed for that purpose now marked Ext. P.W.228/3. On the back of the search warrant, I submitted the execution report.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
The search warrant does not show the date when it was issued.
Page: 528
TO COURT
I submitted the execution report on 29.1.68 as my endorsement show. My application for the search warrant was also made on 29.1.68. (No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.)
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
CORRECTION
12.12.1968.
P. W. 228, Mr. A. K. M. Ahsanullah has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
On page 1317 in the second line the word ‘copy of’ before the word “statement” should be inserted.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 529
DEPOSITION OF P.W.229, MR. MAJOR S.R. RAHIM ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Major S.B. Rahim, son of late S.A. Rahim aged 42 years, I am Major in the Army Medical Corps, C.M.H., Dacca.
I am Major in the Army Medical Corps and is posted now at the C.M.H., Dacca for the last three months. I see here the Admission & Discharge Register of the C.M.H., Dacca, already marked Ext. P.W. 219/6. This is kept in due course of official business in the C.M.H.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
If a patient staying in the C.M.H. wants to go out of the hospital temporarily, he was to obtain the permission of the officer-in-charge of the particular. If the patient in question is an officer then he also has to obtain permission by giving reason orally. The same procedure is followed in Dacca C.M.H. If one officer at a station wants to leave the station, he has to obtain written permission from the Commanding Officer. If a patient is transferred from Comilla C.M.H. to Dacca C.M.H. then there has to be a movement order which contains the authority to travel. I do not know whether there is a register in the Dacca C.M.H. which as to be signed before an Officer-patient can go out to doom the hospital ward.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 531
DEPOSITION OF P.W. 230, MAJOR A.M. CHOWDHURY
ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Major A.M. Chowdhury, son of Mr. Abdul Muhib Chowdhury, aged 38 years. I am Major in the Army Medical Corps at C.M.H., Comilla.
I am Major in the Army Medical Corps attached to C.M.H., Comilla. I see before me an Admission and Discharge register of Comilla C.M.H already marked Ext. P.W.21915. This is maintained in the C.M.H., Comilla in due course of official business.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
In some hospitals, a register is maintained which has to be signed by an officer-patient before he goes out of the hospital, temporarily. I do not know whether such a register is maintained in the Comilla C.M.H. Sometimes a chit is also signed by an officer-patient who wants to go out of the hospital and it is put before the medical officer who counter-signs it. Normally, the medical officer permits but sometimes it has to be put us before the Officer Commanding for permission. One of these two procedures has to be followed in a C.M.H. before an officer patient goes out of the hospital temporarily.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 533
DEPOSITION OF P.W.231, Dr. MOBARAK HOSSAIN ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION.
My name is Dr. Mobarak Hossain, son of Mvi. Makbul Hossain, aged 41 years. I am an officiating Deputy Director of Health Services, Government of East Pakistan, Dacca.
I am an Officiating Deputy Director of Health Services, Government of East Pakistan, Dacca. I have brought a file from my office. Our office received an order from the High Court of East Pakistan for constituting of Medical Board of re-examining the health condition of Kamaluddin Ahmed and Sultan Ahmed on 25.12.67. On the Same day, a board was constituted for Kamaluddin’s examination. This is a copy of the order of the High Court which was received in our office now marked Ext. P.W.231/1 (2 leaves). The Board consisted of Dr. Md. Ghulam Kibria, Principal, Dacca Medical College, President Dr. S. M. Rab, Professor of Medicine, Dacca, Medical College, Member, Dr. A. A. Khan, Professor of E.N.T., Dacca Medical College, Member, Dr. Mrs. Farhana, Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Dacca Medical College, Member, and Dr. A. S. M. Haque, Professor of Medicine, Sir Salimullah Medical College, Dacca, Member. The office copy of the order constituting this Board is now marked, Ext. P.W.231/2. The report of the Board was submitted to the secretary, Health Deptt. Government of East Pakistan.
Our office also received a similar order from the High Court of East Pakistan for examination, of the health of Sultanuddin Ahmed on 28th December 67. (The copy of the High Court order is now marked Ext. P. W. 231/2. After receiving that order a Special Board was constituted consisting of Dr. Kibria, President, Dr. S. M. Rab, Professor of Medicine, Dacca. Member, Dr. Ali Afzal Khan., doctor of E.N.T., Dacca
Page: 535
Medical College and Dr. Farhana, Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Dacca Medical College, Member. The order constituting the Board is now marked Ext. P.W.231/4. The Board submitted the report, which was sent to Secretary, Health Service, Government of East Pakistan, Dacca.
CROSS-EXAMINATION DECLINED
Chairman
Member
Member.
CORRECTION
12.12. 1968.
P.W.23, Dr. Mobarak Hossain has read over his statement to himself and now states as follows:
In the fifth line from the bottom on page 1335, instead of “Doctor” the word “Professor” should be substituted. In the fourth line from the bottom of the same page instead of ‘Associate’, it should be ‘Assistant’.
The same correction is called for on page 1334 in the last line instead of ‘Associate’ it should be ‘Assistant’.
The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 536
DISPOSITION OF P.W.232, MD. ISRAIL ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Md. Israil, son of Haji Asad Ali, aged 46 years, I am Inspector of Police attached to Special Branch, Dacca.
I am Inspector of Police attached to Special Branch, Dacca. I was appointed a member of the Investigating Team in this case on the 1st February, 1968 by an order already marked Ext. P.W.212/1. After being appointed as an Investigator in this case I examined witnesses. I also took specimen handwritings of some suspects in the presence of G. M. Qadri, Additional District Magistrate Dacca, Mr. Afsaruddin Ahmed Magistrate, first class, Dacca and Mr. A. Q. Choudhury, Magistrate, First Class, Dacca. After obtaining the specimen writings, I sent them as well as some relevant documents to the Superintendent, C.I.D. Science Section for onward transmission to the Expert. Mr. Khaleque, Special Superintendent of Police also forwarded some documents to the handwriting experts. Those were sent to the S.P., C.I.D., Science Section with a forwarding report requesting him to send the relevant documents to the handwriting experts for comparison.
I made a request to Mr. A.Q. Chowdhury for holding T.I. parade of Sultanuddin Ahmed and Khurshiduddin Ahmed Alias Panno. This is the application that I filed before the Magistrate now marked Ext. P.W.232/1. The endorsement of the Magistrate on the margin is also on this document. I submitted my case diaries to my Special Superintendent of Police, Mr. Khaleque.
Page: 537
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
I am not aware whether there was a prior investigation in this case by the Military Authorities. It never occurred to me also that there was such an investigation. I have not heard of it since.
TO COURT
I recorded the statements of the witnesses correctly without adding anything to or omitting anything from what they stated.
TO MR. ZULMAT ALI KHAN
The portions marked A to A, B to B, C to C, D to D and E to E in this copy of the statement of Shamsuddin Ahmed represent correctly, what he stated to me.
The portions marked A to A, B to B, C to C and D to D in this copy of the statement of Jalaluddin Ahmed represent correctly, what he stated to me.
Page: 538
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
Record of Proceedings Present 12.12.1968.
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M. R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member For the Prosecution …………. As before. For the Defence …………… As before. Accused present As before. Witness on oath …………… As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.232, MR. ISRAIL CONTINUES TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
By the same order which applied to me, Mr. Abdus Sattar Choudhury was also appointed a member of the Investigation Team. We all worked as a team under the special supervision of the S.P. We used to meet in conference with the S.P. occasionally. I never saw any military officer visiting the Rajarbagh Interrogation Centre. In those conferences which we had together, I never heard which accused was arrested by whom or where or when. In any of the conferences attended by me, this subject did not come up for discussion. I know the dates of arrest of those accused who were examined by me but I do not know where they
Page: 539
were arrested or by whom. I did not investigate any other case against Sk. Mujibur Rahman, accused. I was once, however, a complainant against him in one case and I gave evidence in that case. I do not know what the result of that case was. I never attempted to find out the result of the case in which I might have been complainant in some political cases rising in the Ramna area. After I had joined the Investigation Team I was briefed by my S.P. as to the facts of the case. I was assigned the task of interrogating the persons who had not so far been interrogated or questioned, I did examine Sgt. Shamsuddin. I examined him on 7.3.68. I do not know if he had not been examined by any other authority till then. When I examined him, I was not aware that he had already made a statement before a Magistrate on 17.2.68. I came to know of that fact at a subsequent stage. I did not try to find out before going to examine him whether he had already made a statement before any police officer or before a Magistrate earlier. It was in the last part of May, 1968 that I came to know of his statement before a Magistrate.
I also examined Jalaluddin Ahmed in the Dacca Cantt. while he was under military custody. I did ask him how long he had been in custody. I do not know where he is now. I later learnt that Jalaluddin Ahmed had not been made an accused in this case. He was released from custody to my knowledge but I cannot give the date of his release. I have no paper with me to show that he was released; or any such note in my diary. Shamsuddin Ahmed was also examined by me while he was under military custody. I did not enquire from either Shamsuddin or Jalaluddin Ahmed as to where any one of them had been under judicial custody at any time. I was verbally instructed by my S.P. to examine them. I have noted that fact in my diary. I find from the note that the instruction was given by Mr. A. K. M. Ahsanullah, D.S.P. Mr. Khaleque had taken over the charge of the investigation earlier than this. Normally, if I want the services of a Magistrate for holding T.I. parade, I would approach the Dy. Commissioner for deputing a Magistrate for the purpose. On 18.5.68 I did not write to the Dy. Commissioner for making a Magistrate available for holding the T.I. parade. I had written directly to Mr. A.Q. Choudhury as I came to know that he had already been deputed by the
Page: 540
Deputy Commissioner to hold T.I. Parades in this case. I had seen a copy of an order in my office detailing him for holding the T.I. parades in this case. There was no date specified for the parades in that order. That order authorised him to hold T.I. parade generally in this case.
I cannot remember now who showed that copy of the order to me. I remember I had brought some witnesses to the Cantt. in connection with the T.I. parades held by Mr. Choudhury earlier. I had brought those witnesses from the S.B. office. There might be 10 or 12 persons who I brought. I brought them to the Signal Mess. From here, I sent them under the escort of a watcher of the S.B. to the place of T.I. parades. I knew the place where the parade was being held but I cannot name it. I was in the Cantt. area. At that time, I knew the name of the place but I have forgotten it now. I myself never attended the place of the T.I. parades on any day. It is not a fact that I was present at all the T.I. parades at that place. It is not a fact that I had coached the witness who attended the T.I. parades, at the S.B. office, as to who they should identify. It is not a fact that I had shown photographs of the accused to be included in any particular parade to the witnesses before bringing them. It is not correct that I only carried out the orders of the Army authorities and was not an independent investigator.
TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
I visited the Cantt. Several times in connection with this case. I had met Major Naser and Lt. Sharif on certain occasions. I made no enquiries from them as to anything in connection with this case. They also gave me no information concerning the investigation of this case. It did occur to me that they could give some useful information. When questioned as to why then he did not ask them anything, the witness now says, ‘in fact, it did occur to me’. It is not a fact that I am suppressing the facts that I could learn from the military authorities in this case. I have not noted in my case diary the description of the place where the T.I. parade was held.
(No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Page: 541
FURTHER EXAMINATION WITH LEAVE OF THE COURT TO MR. T. H. KHAN
What I meant to say yesterday by saying that I had sent the specimen writings with relevant documents for transmission to the handwriting expert is that I had sent the specimen writings with some previous writings of the suspects.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
CORRECTION
12.12.1968.
P.W.232, Mr. Md. Israil has read over his statement to himself and now he states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
. Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 542
DEPOSITION OF P.W.233, MR. M. A. RAZA ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is M.A. Raza, son of late Syed Abdul Ghani, aged 38 years, I am an Assistant in the office of the Legal Remembrancer, East Pakistan, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am an Assistant in the office of the Legal Remembrancer, East Pakistan, Dacca. I have brought a certified copy of a Writ Petition filed by Begum Hasina Kamaluddin in the High Court of East Pakistan. This copy was obtained by the Legal Remembrancer from the High Court. (It is now marked as Ext. P.W.233/1). The Legal Remembrancer also obtained the certified copy of the judgment of the High Court on that Writ Petition and I produce it. (It is now marked as Ext. P.W.233/2). The Legal Rememrancer also obtained the certified copies of the two reports of the Medical Board in respect of two persons from the High Court, which I produce. (They are now marked as Exts. P.W.233/3 and P.W.233/4. These copies are accepted subject to the originals being proved). The Legal Remembrancer also obtained the certified copy of the Order passed on a supplementary Petition put up in the High Court in connection with the main Writ Petition and I hereby produce it. (This copy is now marked as Ext. P.W.233/5). I also produce the certified copy of a Petition presented to the High Court for setting up a Medical Board. This was also obtained by the Legal Rememberancer and I hereby produce it (It is
Page: 543
now marked as Ext. P.W.233/6). All the certified copies will be accepted as evidence, if the originals are proved.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Member
CORRECTION
12.12. 1968.
P.W.233, Mr. M. A. Raza has read over his statement to himself and now he states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 544
DEPOSITION OF P.W.234, MR. ABU AHED ON SOLEMN
AFFIRMATION
My name is Abu Ahmed, son of late Mahtabuddin Ahmed, aged 47 years, I am the Superintendent of Writ Section, High Court, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I am the Superintendent of the Writ Section in the High Court at Dacca. I have brought the original Writ Petition filed by Begum Hasina Kamal in the High Court. This is the original of the certified copy of Ext. of P.W.233/1. Ext. P.W.233/2 is the certified copy of the Order passed by the Division Bench on 17.1.68. I have also brought from the High Court office the original report of the Medical Board of which Ext. P.W.233/3 is a certified copy. I have also brought the original report of the Medical Board regarding Sultanuddin Ahmed of which Ext. P.W.233/4 is the certified copy obtained from the High Court. I have brought the original Order of which Ext. P.W.233/5 is the certified copy obtained from the High Court. I have also got the original Petition of which Ext. P.W.233/6 is the certified copy obtained from the High Court.
CROSS-EXAMINATION Declined.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 545
CORRECTION
12.12.68.
P.W.234, Mr. Abu Ahmed has read over his statement to himself and now states that it has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 546
DEPOSITION OF P.W.235, ABDUL MANNAF ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Abdul Mannaf, son of Ekin Ali, aged 44 years. I am a handwriting Expert.
I am a handwriting expert. I have been working as such since 1961. I am attached to the C.I.D. East Pakistan, Dacca. I was trained departmentally in the C.I.D. in this work. The specimen writings of Amir Hossain Mia in four sheets already marked Ext. P.W.181/1. were forwarded to me along with a ‘Friend’s Diary of 1964’ for comparison of these writings with the writings in this diary. I see here that diary marked Ext. P.W.3/14. I compared the writings in this dairy marked by the as ‘T’ and ‘TI’ in ink on the last page of this diary, with the specimen writings. My opinion is as follows: The writings marked as ‘TI agree with the specimen writings marked as 21 series i.e. of Amir Hossain Mia, which bears the mark Ext. P.W.181/1 in movement, speed, alignment, approximate size, spacing, pen-scope and design of the letters and also in the execution of individual characteristics of writings in all minute details, having no fundamental divergence in them Hence.
I am of the opinion that the writer of 21 series is the author of the writing marked as ‘TI’
The writing marked as ‘T’ disagrees with the specimen writing marked as 21 series in both general and individual characteristics of writing. Hence, I am of the opinion that the writer of 21 series is not the author of the writing marked as ‘T’. The two writings ‘t’ and ‘TI’ are now marked Ext. P.W.235/1 and P.W.235/2.
I also produced an enlargement of the writings of both ‘T’ and ‘TI’ and 21 series. (The enlargement of ‘T’ and ‘TI’ is marked Ext. P.W.235/3 and the
Page: 547
enlargement of the specimen writing, Ext. P.W.235/4). On average, I had been giving opinions as an expert on writings at the rate of 20 per month. (The report of the Handwriting Expert is marked Ext. P.W.235/5).
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.235 TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
In the enlargement of the relevant writing marked by me as T and T1, which has been marked in this Court as Ext P.W.235/3, there is a slant to the right of the letters, but I cannot say the exact degree of the slant at this stage. I have the instrument for measuring the slant at my laboratory. I did note the degree of the slant in my report. I cannot say if, in T-1, the slant will be about 20 to 25 degrees or more. I cannot give the slant of the sample writing of which the enlargement is marked Ext. P.W.235/4, even approximately. In my opinion, the slant in T-1 as well as in the specimen writing is the same. I have not noted in my report the points of similarities and dissimilarities between T-1 and the specimen writing. I do not agree that the figure ‘3’ in the original is slanted towards the left. To me, it is almost vertical. In the sample writing the figure ‘3’ is slightly slanting to the left in the finishing. The up-stroke of the letter ‘m’ is the same in both the writing. The letter *r’ in the original has a loop like the one in the sample writing. The loop in the original is almost imperceptible but the loop in the sample writing is very clear. I do not agree that the commencement of the letter ‘r’ is with a small curve in the original but in the sample; it is very clear and distant. It is not correct to say that in the letter ‘b’ in the original there is an imperceptible loop but it is a prominent loop in the sample writing. In the original, the letters ‘ba’ are written with the lift of the pen but in the sample they are written in one operation. The end stroke of the letter ‘y’ in the original ends with a straight stroke but in the sample writing the end-stroke is a bit curved leftwards. The letter ‘u’ in the original has a slant to the right and in the sample; the letter ‘u’ has also a slant towards the right but to the same extent. It is not correct that in the original the letter ‘u’ has a definite slant to the right whereas in the sample there is no such slant. In the sample it has also a slant in the right side. It is also not correct that the slant in the
Page: 548
original is very clear and in the specimen, the slant is imperceptible. The finishing stroke of the letter ‘r’ in the original is angular and so is the case in the specimen writing. In the capital letter ‘R’ in the original a downward stroke and the upward stroke unite to a large extent except at the beginning. The downward stroke and the upward stroke in the specimen in the same letter are separate but not almost parallel. At the bottom, there is no separation in the specimen but there is at the top. In the specimen at the bottom, they are united. In the original, the top of the letter ‘r’ is a clear curve. It is not a fact that it is a clear angle. In my opinion, it is also a curve.
It is not correct that to say the letter ‘r’ is not circular but it is elliptical. In the specimen, the letter ‘ah’ is also elliptical. It is not elongated in comparison with the original. In the original in the last but one letter ‘a’, the up stroke and down stroke, almost make a loop. In the sample, the loop is larger and extends up to the next movement. The figure ‘2’ and ‘9’ in the original has been written in one operation. In the sample, they are disjointed. The figure ‘9’ is a downward angular shape. It is not a curve but angular. In the sample, the same joint is very distinctly angular. Both of these are angular. The specimen is more angular than the original. In the beginning of the letter ‘e’ in the original. There is no curve. In the specimen, it is also the same. The loop at the top of the capital letter ‘e’ is almost circular. In the specimen that is slightly longer. It is not a fact that in the end stroke of the capital letter ‘E’ and the next letter ‘I’ there is no loop. There is a clear loop but there is no gap in it. In the sample, there is a small gap. In the letter, ‘T in the original there is a loop. It is oval at the top but angular at the bottom. In the original, the small letter ‘p’ is circular at the top and also at the lower part. On the top, it is an angular curve. In the sample, there is a clear angle. In the original the angular shape is also clear but not prominent. There is no curve at the end of the small letter l’ in the sample, the curve is almost a loop. It is not correct to say that in the original, the end stroke ends abruptly but in the sample it is a curve. In the letter ‘r’ of the word ‘road’, the commencement is a bit to the left. In the sample, the commencement is a bit to the right. The loop at the top
Page: 549
of the capital letter ‘R’ in the original is not elongated at the top but it is elliptical and angular at the bottom. It is a bit elongated. The tap of the letter ‘r’ in the sample does not approximate to a circle. It is a continues elliptical. In the sample, it is also elliptical and not triangular. In the last stroke of the letter ‘d’ in the original, there is a very minute curve to the right at the bottom. It tails off to the right in the sample. The loop at the commencement of the letter ‘d’ in the original does not merge with the next upward stroke. They slightly merge but not completely. In the sample, they are bifurcated. The capital letter ‘D’ in the word *Dacca’ is written in two operations in the original. The same letter in the sample is written in one operation in the original, the upward and downward stroke in the bottom, tails off the left. In the sample also there is a tail but executed in different forms. The commencement and the end strokes of the letter ‘d’ do not cross each other. The commencement stroke and the ending stroke of the letter ‘d’ in the sample cross one another and in the original, it is executed in different forms. The letter ‘a’ in the original in the word ‘Dacca’ is slight to the right but almost in elliptical form. It is not correct that in the sample it is almost upright. In the 2 letters ‘c’ of the word ‘Dacca’ in the original there are loops at the top. They are both slanting towards the right. In the sample, the first letter ‘c’ is almost upright. The next letter ‘c’ is slightly towards the right. In the last letter ‘a’ the 2 up strokes are distinct in the original. It is not correct that in the sample, the first up stroke is in the top and the second one is in the bottom. I did not note any of these characteristics in my report in detail. Mr. Osborn is the greatest authority on questioned documents. These differences, which have been pointed out, are not fundamental in nature. Sample writing is a bit strained.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
I was serving in the CID since 1954 as a fingerprinting expert and then from 1961, I became a handwriting expert. My office is situated at Rajarbagh. I did not meet the Investigating Officers in this case in my office during the last 6 months. Mr. Quraishi was also here in connection
Page: 550
with the examination of documents as a handwriting expert. I do not know where he exactly comes from. Probably he comes from West Pakistan. I heard his name is an expert but I did not meet him earlier. He had a working room in Rajarbagh. I had my own separate room. I did not work in his room. I do not know how many other handwriting experts are there who gave opinion in this case. My direction and supervision. I have no expert knowledge of photography. The fact that the documents sent to me were in connection with this case was noted in the forwarding report. The name of the person who wrote the specimen was also written at the top of the sheet. It was forwarded to me by Mr. M. Israil. I know Mr. Israil as an officer. I do not know whether he is an investigating officer in this case but I know him that he is an officer. The supply of standard writing is not essential in all cases. It is only necessary in cases of conscious samples. It is helpful no doubt to have standard writing for comparison. I have no where mentioned in my report that the sample here is not a conscious writing.
I have not given any illustration in respect to movement, speed, alignment, approximate size, spacing pen-scope, design of letters. Before giving this opinion, I studied the matter for about three days. I cannot remember whether during these three days I studied other documents as well. I do not remember as to how much exclusive time I devoted for arriving at the opinion in this matter. The documents were forwarded to my Deputy Superintendent of Police who endorsed them to me on 23.5.68. I started working on it on that very day. I finished examining the documents on 25.5.68. It is not correct to say that Army Officers used to visit me concerning these documents. It is not a fact that I being a police employee have given a perfunctory report in favour of the Government. It is also not correct that I have given wrong report in respect of the questioned documents. It is not a fact, that I have been dictated in giving this opinion by Mr. Quraishi.
TO COURT
I prepared some rough notes at the time of the examination of the documents, but I destroyed them after preparing my final report. I did not
Page: 551
incorporate them in the final report because I thought that would make the report lengthy.
(No other Counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness).
Further examination with the leave of the Court.
Mr. A. Khaleque is the D.I.G. of our branch. My office is in a different building from the building in which the Special Branch is located in the same compound.
CROSS- EXAMINATION Declined.
Admitted to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Member
CORRECTION
2.1.1969.
P.W.255, Mr. Abdul Mannaf has read over his statement and now states as follows:
At page 1352 in the 4th line from the bottom after the words ‘specimen writing the words ‘in details’ may be added. The rest of the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member.
Member
Page: 552
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS. PRESENT.
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.236, MR. ABDUR RAHMAN SARDAR ON SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Abdur Rahman Sardar, son of Late Mvi. Siamuddin Sardar, by faith a Muslim, aged 48 years. I am the Assistant Registrar (Writs), High Court, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I see here the original Writ Petition in the record brought from the High Court, Dacca, bearing No. 585 of 1967. The affidavit in support of the Petition on the record was signed by Begum Hasina Kamal and she signed it in my presence. I see here another original Petition for the purpose of getting Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed and Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed examined by a Medical Board in the record from the High Court. The affidavit in support of this petition was also signed by Begum Hasina Kamal in my presence and this exists on the record. Begum Hasina
Page: 553
Kamal described herself as the wife of Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed in the affidavit and gave her address as 29/3, Outer circular Road, Dacca-2.
CROSS-EXAMINATION: Declined.
Chairman. Member Member
CORRECTION
2.1.1969.
P.W.236, Mr. Abdur Rahman Sardar has read over his statement to himself and now states that the statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
Page: 554
DEPOSITION OF P.W.237, DR. MD. GULAM KIBRIA ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Dr. Md. Gulam Kibria son of late Mvi. Alimuddin Ahmed, aged 59 years, by faith a Muslim, Principal, Sir Salimullah Medical College, Dacca.
TO MR. T. H. KHAN
I was the Principal of the Dacca Medical College in December 1967. I see here the medical report regarding the examination of Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed, the Director of Health Services, Govt. of East Pakistan had constituted a Medical Board which examined Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed and drew up this report. I was President of that Medical Board. Other members of the Board were Dr. S. M. Rab, Professor of Medicine, Dacca Medical College, Syed Moinul Huq, Professor of Medicine, Sir Salimullah Medical College, Dacca, Dr. Ali Afzal Khan, Professor of ENT Diseases, Dacca Medical College and Dr. (Mrs.) Farhana Hossain, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry of Dacca Medical College. I, along with the other members of the Board, personally examined Mr. Kamaluddin Ahmed before drawing up the report. The result of our examination was correctly incorporated in this report. Ext. P.W. 233/3 is the certified copy of the original report of the Medical Board which is before me. Our findings were as follows: “He is well-built. Pulse 78/B.P.-110/80, Resp.20, Team 98′ F. C.V.S. – N.A.D. including chest X-Ray &
Page: 557
E.C.G. which are within normal limits. C.N.S. – N.A.D. (Nothing abnormal detected) Resp. – N.A.D. E.N.T.-N.A.D. – hearing normal both ears, Membranes – intact, Eustachian tubes – patent. Conversation and whispered voice – Normal. Skeleton Normal. No evidence of bony injury. External genitalia – Normal. No. marks of injury in the scrotum, penis or anus. Psychiatry: Orientation – Normal Memory – Normal Conversation – Normal Emotion – Normal to the circumstances.
Special investigation: Random BI, Sugar – 150 mg/100 ml. Blood Urea 33 mg/100 ml. Urine Exam. – Albumen Nil.
Sugars Microscopy – N. A.D. Hb% – 85%, E.S.R. – 13 mm/hr. T.C. – 4900/m.m. Poly -73% Lymph. – 23% Eosino – 4%
Conclusion
The Board does not find any evidence of disease, disability or injury, to necessitate his stay or treatment in the hospital.”
All members of the Board signed the report in my presence. This Board had conducted the Examination on the 25th of December, 1967 at 9 A.M.
Page: 558
Another Medical Board was constituted and met on 30.12.67 at 12 noon. I again was the President of this Board and the other members were the same as in the first Board. On this occasion, Sultanuddin Ahmed was examined by the Board. On examination his pulse was found to be 83 per minute; Blood Pressure-120/80; Respiration-22 per minute, Temperature-98.2°F., CNS including chest X’ray and ECG-nothing abnormal detected, CBS-nothing abnormal detected. (CBS means Central Nervous System). Respiration-nothing abnormal detected; ENT Otitis external (External ear infection); Member intact; hearing normal, skeleton and External Genetalia-normal, Psychiatry-normal. Special Investigation-Albumen sugar in urine-normal, Microscopic-normal; Blood sugar 100 mg. per 100, Blood Urea 24 mg per 100 mm, Hemoglobin-85% ESR 2 mm per hour, Total Count 8,000 per mm., poly60%; Lympho-32% ; Mono-1%; Esonofelea-7%; Conclusion-The Board cannot find any disease or injury except otitis external which does not require in-patient treatment in a hospital. All the members of the Board signed this report in my presence. The certified copy Ext. P.W.233/4 is in the exact copy of this report.
CROSS-EXAMINATION TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
The Psychiatrist when she examined the two persons concerned did so in my presence and I was observing what she was examining. I am not a specialist in Psychiatry. The lady Doctor is a specialist in that branch. Dr. S. M. Rab had examined the blood pressure in both the cases. The examination of Kamaluddin Ahmed lasted about an hour. The blood was examined in each case by the Pathologist. I cannot give the name of the Pathologist. His name is not recorded in the report. Pathologist’s report was taken from the history sheet. Dr. Moinul Huq and Dr. S.M. Rab, as well as all other members of the Board including myself, examined the bodies of the two persons concerned for any possible injuries in respect of the regions complained of by them or other parts of the body. We could not find out if he had pain inside the stomach or any other parts of the body unless he complained. Without any mark of any external injury,
Page: 559
it was not possible for us to find out if he had any internal injury unless he complained about it.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN AHMED
Both the Boards were constituted by the Director of Health Services, East Pakistan. I received a communication from the Director of Health Services intimating the constitution of the Boards and asking us to examine the two persons that communication must be in the record of the Principal, Medical College. I have not brought it today. I cannot exactly say who was the Principal of Sir Salimullah Medical College at that time. Most probably, Dr. Rahman was officiating that time. Most probably Dr. Rahman was officiating in that capacity. I was appointed principal of the Dacca Medical College in substantive capacity for three months. Col. (Dr.) Burhanuddin, the permanent Principal of the College had gone abroad. I cannot remember on which date I took over as a substantive principal. Before appointment as Principal, I was Vice-Principal and Dy. Supdt. of the college. The communication I received from the Director of Health Services. East Pakistan was addressed to me as principal of the Medical College. It came to the official address as principal of the Medical College without mentioning my name. I took over as principal of the Sir Salimullah Medical College two and a half months back. The order of my appointment as the Principal, Dacca Medical College just said that I was appointed Principal without mentioning any period of appointment. I have no copy of the appointment order with me. The order must be in the record of the Principal, Medical College, Dacca. After Dr. Burhanuddin returned from abroad I was reverted to my own post as Vice-Principal and Dy. Supdt. of the Medical College, Dacca. Actually, the position is that I was appointed to officiate as principal in the absence of Dr. Burhanuddin. I am now holding the permanent post of Principal of the Sir Salimullah Medical College. I am only and an M.B.B.S. from Calcutta University. I joined service in Calcutta as Assistant Surgeon in 1942.
Page: 560
The purpose of the formation of the two boards was the examination of the two detenus. The Board in each case set in the room of the Superintendent of the Medical College. The first detenu was brought at 9 A.M. and the second one at 12 noon. The police guard brought the detenus on each occasion. The police people accompanying the detenu identified him in each case. I do not know who the police officer was. All the examinations of Kamaluddin were done in the space of one hour. The pathologist had already examined the two cases before the boards met. I cannot say when the pathologist had examined the blood etc. The pathologist had examined the blood and urine, not in my presence. The microscopic examination has been done by me also of blood and urine in other cases. The blood examination can be conducted by the pathologist within 48 hours. The reports about blood and urine were already with us when the board met. The reports of the pathologist must have contained the dates of the examination. We did not mention those dates nor the name of the pathologist in our reports of the Board. I cannot say where the pathologists had examined the blood and urine of each of these persons unless I see the papers themselves. It is not recorded and therefore, I cannot say if the stools of any of them were examined. If there is an internal injury to the rectum, there may be mark of blood of the stools. I did not consider it necessary to get the stools examined in view of the allegation made that a baton had been inserted in his rectum. None of the other members of the Board either made that suggestion. It is recorded in the report of Kamaluddin in the third paragraph that “his symptoms now consist of noise in the head, loss of sensation in the perennial region”. It depends on the size of the bruise by stick blow on the body as to when it may disappear. A small bruise may disappear within a few hours, but a big bruise may take as many as 21 days to disappear. If a pin is inserted below the fingernail, the external mark of the injury will disappear, in a period depending on the severity of the injury. Again, my answer would be the same with respect to the swelling caused by a blow on one part of the body. It is not recorded in the report as to when Kamaluddin alleged that he had been manhandled. If a
Page: 561
serious slap is given on the fact, the mark will take about 21 days for disappearance. I cannot say who had taken x-ray and where of any of the two persons unless I see the original papers. It is quite wrong to say that we made our reports merely on the basis of the expert’s reports which had been faked merely to oblige the authorities. I might or might not be able now to identify Kamaluddin or Sultanuddin. It is wrong to suggest that I had forced the other members of the board to submit wrong report at any instance.
No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.
Read and found to be correct.
Chairman.
Member
Member.
CORRECTION
3.1.1969.
P.W.237 Dr. Ghulam Kibria has read over his statement to himself and states as follows:
The statement has been correctly recorded.
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 562
DEPOSITION OF P.W.238 ABDUL KADER ON
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
My name is Abdul Kader son of Mvi. Torab Ali aged 43 years, I am Inspector of Police, C.I.D., Dacca.
I am handwriting Expert attached to C.I.D. since 1956 at Dacca. Prior to that, I had obtained two year’s training in the C.I.D. as Handwriting Expert. I am the officer-in-charge of the Handwriting Bureau of the C.I.D. I was directed by the Superintendent of Police, C.I.D. to examine certain documents. Those documents were taken from Mr. A. Majid Quraishi of the Intelligence Bureau, Rawalpindi. He gave me the following documents, one Friends Diary and 13 letters in Bengali all containing writings and marked by me as QI, Q2(a), Q2(b), Q5(a), Q5(b), Q5(c), Q10, Q10(a), Q11, Q11(a), Q12, Q13, 13(a), Q13(b), Q14, Q14(a), Q3, Q4, Q7, Q7(a), Q8, Q8(a), Q6, Q6(a), and Q15 along with some specimen writings said to be of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain, some of them being marked by me as $17, S18, S19, S20, S21, S22, S23, S23(a) S24, S24(a), S25 and S26.
I have mentioned 13 letters in Bengali as I have marked them in that number.
I got also the specimen writings of Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed. Some of them were marked by me as S1, S2, S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8, 89, 910, and S11. I also received the specimen writings of Mr. Md. Khurshid Pannu which were marked by me as S12 to $16.
I also got the specimen writings of one Mr. Mujibur Rahman, some of them were marked by me as S-29 and S-30.
I examined these documents and made necessary comparison and my opinion along with my grounds are as follows:
Page: 563
The Bengali questioned writings marked Q1, Q2, Q(a) Q2(b), Q5(a), Q5(b), Q5(c), Q10, Q10(a), Q11, Q11(a), Q12, Q13, Q13(a), Q13(b), Q14 and Q14(a) appearing in these letters when compared inters so agree both in general and individual characteristics of writings including the execution and arrangement of the different letters and words with some natural variation only and as such I am of opinion that the above questioned writings have been executed by the same individual.
The questioned writings when compared with the specimen writings marked S17 to S26 agree in movement, speed, alignment, slant, penposition, shape, size, etc. and also in the individual characteristics of writings, for example, execution and arrangement of the different letters and stroke with some variations at some places which are either natural or the result of the conscious products of the individual concerned. The fact that, the specimen has been executed in a bit conscious way is evident when the different sheets of the specimen writings are examined inter so.
Among the agreements a good number of the Major and important characters of the writer are noted below:
(1) The execution of the letter ”, The letter ‘F’ is executed having its finishing hook in the form of an islet almost at the base on the line of writing (The letter is underlined in the enlargement).
(2) The execution of the letter ” with the special reference to its commencement from a medial position having a well shaped curve to the left of the letter. (This characteristic is also underlined in the enlargement).
(3) The peculiar execution of the letter ‘s’, the writer appears to execute the letter in separate operations. (It is underlined in the enlargement).
(4) The execution of the letter with the special reference to its commencement. The letter is commenced with a vertical stroke. (vide Q2(a), Q2(b), S22, S19, S17).
(5) The special execution of the letter ‘G’, the letter is executed in 2 different forms:
(a) Copy book form.
Page: 564
(b) Simplified form.
When it is executed in copy book form the final stroke of the letter goes downward below the line and when it is executed in a simplified manner the letter is completed in one operation excluding the head stroke with an islet almost at the base. (vide Q2, Q2B, Q5, Q10m, Q11, Q22, S21).
(6) The execution of the letter f’, sometimes the letter G’ is finished by a slant stroke and sometimes with a hook or with the tendency of making a hook either to the right or to the left. This is the habit of the writer in the execution of this letter (vide Q2, Q5, Q10, Q11, Q12. Q13, Q14, Q22, Q19).
(7) The special execution of the letter ‘f’ which is finished to the left. (This letter has been underlined in the enlargement).
(8) The nature of the execution of the letter ‘op’ which is done in a simplified way. (This has also been underlined in the enlargement).
(9) The execution of the letter ‘FF’, the loop of the letter ‘Z’ is finished almost at the base and goes upward with a flying curve. Sometimes the writer commences the letter in a peculiar way. (Vide the word ‘Capground in Q2, Q20 the word ‘ 19’ in Q30, the word ‘P’ ‘——- ‘in Q14(a) etc).
(10) The execution of the letter ‘7’. In most of the cases, the letter ‘z’ is commenced with a short circular or stroke. (Vide the words nie’ and ” in Q2 and Q5, the word nie in Q15 the word ‘n’ and ‘afa’ in Q10 the word ‘afa’ in Q11 the same word which has been curved by a stroke in Q14, the word ‘Ta’ in Q14(a) etc.)
(11) The execution of the letter boy with a special reference to its connection of the 2 loops with the vertical stroke. (Vide Q1 and 521).
(12) The peculiar execution of the letter ” (Vide the word ‘gary in Q2(a) and S21 etc.).
(13) The execution of the vowel stroke 6-711′ with an elongated loop specially when it is not written in one operation with the letter to which it is applied. (Vide the word ‘e’ in Q5(a) the words ‘appart’, ‘Clytuft ta’ in Q5(b) and Q5(c) the word ‘e’ in Q10, the word Post’ in Q12 the word ‘বেশী’, In Q14 the words ‘তুহিন’, ‘অস্বীকার’ and তাড়াতাড়ী in S21, etc.).
(14) The special habit of the writer in the execution of the vowel stroke ‘%cott’ with backward finished. (Vide the word Corealta’ in Q2, Q12, Q5, the word ’15’ in Q5 (a) the word ‘eta’ in Q10(a) the word ‘ afta’ in
Page: 565
Q11, the word ‘af’ in Q13 the word ‘gjeta’ in S23, the word “staz’ in S19, etc.).
(15) The nature of the application of ‘7-2pme”, to the letter 7., (Vide the word ‘I’ (Q2, the word ‘se’ in Q5, Q6(b), Q10, Q11, Q18, Q17).
(16) The execution and combination of the different letters and the strokes of the word *1′. (Vide Q5(a) and S18 etc.)
(17) The execution of the different letters of the word ‘759’ with a special reference to the application of vowel stroke ‘e-Al’ is the letter ” sometimes the vowel stroke t-p17″ is executed in a peculiar way specially when it is done in one operation with the letter ‘7’. (Vide QI, Q2, Q22, etc.)
(18) The execution and combination of different letters and the strokes of words ‘Ulubat’. (Vide Q2, Q22)..
(19) The execution and the arrangement of the different letters of the words ‘starstar’ with a special reference to the application of the vowel stroke ‘F’. (Vide Q2, Q22).
(20) The execution and combination of the two letters ‘G’ and ‘qu’ in the word ‘fsoepat’ vide q2(a) S22).
(21) The execution and combination of the two letters ‘e’ and ‘F’ appearing in the word ‘*’. (Vide Q2(b) S22 etc.).
(22) The execution and combination of the different letters and the strokes of the word ‘sa’ with a special reference to the position of the head-stroke of the letter ‘7’ and its dot. The head-stroke and the dot of the letter ‘?’ are just above and below of the vowel strokes respectively. (Vide Q5, S18, S19).
(23) The execution and combination of the different letters of the word fast with a special reference to the execution of the vowel stroke “ST1-711′. (Vide Q5, S19).
(24) The execution and the combination of the different letters of the word ‘oficz’ (Vide Q5, S19).
(25) The execution and combination of the different letters and the strokes of the word us with a special reference to ‘-2DT”. (Vide, Q5, S19).
(26) The execution and combination of the different letters of the word ‘ec9027 (Vide Q5(c), s19).
(27) The execution and combination of the different letters and the strokes of the word ‘taal’ (Vide QI0, S18).
Page: 566
(28) The execution and combination of the different letters of the word 79631′ with a special reference to the execution of the letter ‘a’
(29) The execution and arrangement of the different letters of the word ’50’. (Vide Q10, Q10(a) S23).
(30) The execution and combination of the different letters and the strokes of the word ‘CHISTICS577′ with a slight variation in the execution of the letter ” but such y’ is also available in the specimen and has been underlined in the enlargement. (Vide Q10(a), Q11(a), S23, S2, etc.).
31. The execution and combination of the different letters of the word ‘afa’ (Vide Q/10(a) S/23.
32. The execution and combination of the different letters and strokes of the word Tortaita’ with slight variation in the relative position of the letters a’ and ‘st’ at some places (Vide Q/12, S/24 (a).
33. The execution and combination of the different letters of the word ‘Teta’ (Vide Q/13, S24).
34. The execution and combination of the different letters of the word utico’ with a peculiar application of the upper stroke ” along with the vowel stroke’ *4-777′ (Q/13), S/124).
35. The execution and combination of the different letters and strokes of the word “TET’ with a peculiar finish of 7-xpert (Vide Q/13, S/24, etc.).
Some variations, specially with the spelling of some words which are found at some places between the questioned and the specimen writings are the result of conscious predict of the individual concerned and are not fundamental in nature. The word ‘that is spelt in the disputed writing with 6-915’ but in the specimen, it has been spelt both by ‘
6 3′ and – 7137′ (Vide Q/2, S/22, S/21). Similarly the words, ‘sak’, afacu’, ‘e’, Tele”,
f16′, ‘nofsg ‘ have been spelt in different way at different places of the specimen (Vide S/19, S/18 for the word ‘874, S/19, S/17 for the word Sfato’ ; S/19, /S/18 for word he’; S/17, S/19 for the word TOE’, S/21, S/22 for the word ‘n ‘; S/24 for the word ‘af’ etc. ) All these words have been encircled in the enlargement for clear reference. The above variations are some of the instances to show the conscious effort of the writer in writing the specimen.
Page: 567
The change of spelling of the words ‘ড্রান’ into ‘ট্রাঙ্ক’ ‘ফেব্রম্নয়ারী’ ‘ into ‘CPS3′ pallata’ into ‘ etc. which are found at some places between the specimen and the questioned writings are not all fundamental in nature as they can be spelt in both the ways by any writer and this will be evident more clearly from the fact that in the questioned documents the writer has spelt the words ‘ট্রাঙ্ক’ and ‘ফেব্রম্নয়ারী’ in both the ways (vide Q/2(a) and Q/2, Q/2(b) respectively ). Taking the above features into account I am of the opinion that the questioned writings marked by me as Q/1, Q/2, Q/2(a), Q/2(b), Q/5, Q/5(a), Q/5(b), Q/5(c), Q/10, Q10(a), Q11(a), Q12, Q13, Q13/a), Q13/(b), Q/14 and Q14(a) are executed by the individual who wrote the specimen writings marked by me as S/17 to S/26, i.e. by Lt. Com. Moazzem Hossain and not by any other individual.
For the purpose of comparison and also for the perusal of the Court I had the photographic enlargement made by the photographic expert of the questioned writings as well as specimen writings. These are the five charts containing photographic enlargement. They are now marked Ext. P.W.238/1, P.W.238/2, P.W.238/3, P.W.238/4 and P.W.238/5. Ext P.W.238/1, P.W.238/2 and P.W.238/5 relate to questioned documents and the other two relate to the specimen writings.
Ext P.W. 3/18 was marked by me as Q/1. The letter already marked Ext. P.W. 3/32 was marked by me as Q/2, Q/2(a) and Q/2(b). These are the three pages of the same letter. The letter already marked Ext. P.W. 3/35 was marked by me as Q/5. Q5(a), Q/5(b) and Q/5(c). These are the four pages of the same letter. Ext. P.W. 3/49 was marked by me as Q/10 and Q/10(a). These are the two pages of one letter. Ext. P.W. 3/46 was marked by me as Q/11 and Q/11(a). These are the two pages of one letter.
The letter already marked Ext. 3/54 was marked by me as Q/12. The letter already marked Ext. P.W. 3/39 was marked by me as Q/13(a) and Q/13(b). These are three pages of one letter. The letter already marked Ext. P.W. 3/41 was marked by me as Q/14 and Q/14(a). These are the two pages of one letter. The pages dated 23rd January, 24th January, and 25th January and 26th January of the diary already marked Ext. P.W.169/19 by me respectively as S/25, S/26, S/27 and 8/28. The first
Page: 568
page of Ext. P.W.169/25 was marked by me as S/17. The next page of Ext. P.W.169/25 was marked by me as S/18. The page after that of that Ext. marked by me as S/19. The first page of Ext. P.W.169/24 was marked by me as S/20. The next page of Ext. was marked by me as S/21. The page after that of that Ext. was marked by me as the first page of exhibit P.W.169/26 was marked by me as S/23. The next page of that exhibit was marked by me as S/23(a). The page after that was marked by me as S/24. The page after that was marked by me as S/24(a). During my examination, I took into consideration all the specimen Bengali writings of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain sent to me.
I also examined the questioned Bengali writings which were marked by me as Q3, Q4, Q7, Q7(a), Q8, Q8(a) inter se and they were found executed by the same individual as they agreed in general and in individual characteristics of writings. The above questioned writings were examined and compared with the specimen writings marked by me as Sl to S11, said to be of Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed. They agree in movement, speed, alignment, slant, pen position, pen pressure approximate shape and size and also in the unconscious individual characteristics of writings such as the execution and combination of different letters and strokes with some variations in some cases which are either natural or the result of the conscious product of the writings with concerned. The fact that the specimen writings with which comparison was requested have been executed in a bit conscious manner will be evident when the different sheets of the specimen writings are compared amongst themselves.
Amongst the agreements, a good number of the Major and important characteristics of the writings of the writer are noted below.
1) The execution of the vowel ‘3-715’, It is executed in most of the cases in two operations. In some cases by two slanted strokes in the form of the acute angle at the top and in some cases, the first being a slanted curve and the second being and upward curve open at the top. (This character has been arrow-marked in the enlargement).
2) The peculiar execution of the vowel stroke ‘9’-Pla’. In most of the cases, it is executed by making a recurve from the base to the top, i.e.
Page: 569
having a compound curve. (This character is underlined in the enlargements).
3) The habit of executing the stroke ‘7-pont’ with an unusual long curve (vide the word ‘T1781’ and ‘Tuti in Q7, the word ‘8707” in Q8(a) and the words ‘ব্যাবস্থা’ and মধ্যে in S4).
4) The execution of the vowel letter ‘at’. The first curve of the letter is finished facing downward (Vide the words wife and contest in Q3, the word ‘আমাদের’ in 24 the words ‘আশা’ ‘অনেক’ in Q7, the word ‘আমার’ in Q7(a), the words ‘আসিতে’ ‘আসবেন’ Q8 and the words ‘আমি’ ‘আমাদের’ in S1, S4 etc.)
5) The vowel letter ‘a’ is executed in most of the cases with a downward curve having embellishment. (Vide the word ’97’ Q3, the word ‘qu’ in Q8, the words ’49’, ‘u316 in Sl. etc.)
6) The execution of the letter ‘T’ It is executed in most of the cases with a backward curve in the shape of an eyelid at the base having finishing hook in the form of another eyelid just above the former one. (Vide the questioned writings and the specimens. This character has been marked by double strokes in the enlargements).
7) The execution of the letter ‘f’. It has been executed in the form of the letter ‘s’. (Vide the words force’ in Q3 and the same word in S2, S3, etc.)
8) The executed of the letter ‘st’ with a special reference to its commencement. The commencing curve of the letter ‘s’ starts almost from the base of the line of writings (vide the words ‘যােগে’ ‘আগের ‘ in Q3 and the same words in S2).
9) The execution of the letter ‘G’ with a special reference to its finish which is done in majority cases by a downward vertical stroke (vide the word ‘কাজ’ in Q3, the word ‘মজিবর’ in 24 and the words ‘মজিবর’ and ‘জানতে’ in S2, S5 etc.).
(10) The execution of the letter ” with a special reference to its commencement which begins with an inside curve at the top. (Vide the word “Ucie’ in Q7 and the same word in S4).
Page: 570
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
3.1.1969. PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the prosecution … As before. For the Defence … As before. Accused present … As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.238, ABDUL KADER CONTINUED. TO MR. T. H. KHAN
11) The execution of the letter 1. Sometimes the letter gives the shape of the letter “‘ and sometimes the first portion of the letter gives the shape of letter ‘E’ excluding the head stroke and the second portion the shape of the lettera (vide the word stat in Q8, the word ‘mat’ in Q8(a) and the words ‘gla’ and ’77’ 8 in S2 etc.).
12) In writing the vowel letter ‘a’ as the initial of the letter of any word the writer is found in the habit of not to combine it with the subsequent letter of the word (vide the word ‘qu’ in Q8 and Q8(a), the word ’97’ in Q3 and the words and in S1 and S4).
Page: 571
13) The execution of the letter with a special reference to its finish. The letter is finished in most of the cases with an inward curve (vide the word Q8 (a) the word in Q7(a) and the word in S3).
Similarly, the two sets of writings agree in the execution of the other letters and strokes without having any noticeable divergence in them.
The agreements in the combination and arrangements of the different letters and strokes appear in the words’ etc. amongst some others are very much individuality. (Most of the above noted words have been encircled in the enlargement for reference).
Finally, in both the questioned and specimen writings it appears that the writer wrongly spells the word ‘into’ I (vide Q7 and S4)
Taking the above features into account I am of the opinion that all the questioned writings marked Q3, Q4, Q7, Q7(a), 28(a) are executed by the individual who wrote the specimen marked si S11 i.e. by Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed and not by any other individual.
During the examinations, I had photographic enlargements made of these disputed documents and also some of the specimens for the purpose of my comparison and also for the perusal of the Court. I got these made by our photographic expert. These enlargements have been attached in charts. This is the first chart of the questioned document now marked Ext. P.W.238/6. These two charts are the photographic enlargements of the writings now marked Ext. P.W.238/7 and P.W 238/8. The first page of the letter already marked Ext. P.W.3/5 is marked by me as Q3. The next page is marked by me as Q4. The first page of the letter already marked Ext. P.W.3/1 was marked by me as Q7 and the next page of that exhibit is marked by me as Q7(a). The first page of the letter already marked Ext. P.W.3/2 is marked by me as Q8.
Taking the above features into account I am of the opinion that all the questioned writings marked Q3, Q4, Q7, Q7(a), Q9(a)are executed by the individual who wrote the specimen marked Sl. to S11. i.e. by Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed and not by any other individual.
During the examinations, I had photographic enlargements made of these disputed documents and also some of the specimens for the purpose of my comparison and also for the perusal of the Court. I got these made by our photographic expert. These enlargements have been
Page: 572
attached in charts. This is the first chart of the questioned document now marked Ext. P.W.238/6. Those two charts are the photographic enlargements of the writings now marked Ext. P.W.238/7 and P.W.238/8. The first page of the letter already marked Ext. P.W. 3/5 is marked by me as Q3. The next page is marked by me as Q4. The first page of the letter already marked Ext. P.W.3/1 was marked by me as Q7 and the next page of that exhibit is marked by me as Q7(a). The first page of the letter already marked Ext. P.W.3/2 is marked by me as Q8 and the next page of that is marked by me as Q8(a). The first page of Ext. P.W.169/32 is marked by me as Sl. The next page of it is marked by me as S2. The page thereafter is marked by me as S3. The first page of Ext. P.W.169/29 is marked by me as S4. The next page of that exhibit is marked by me as S5. The first page of Ext. P.W. 169/30 is marked by me as S6. The next page of that exhibit is marked by me as S7. The first page of Ext P.W.169/32 is marked by me as S9. The page thereafter is marked by me as S10 and the page after that is marked by me as S11.
I also examined the questioned writings appearing in the Bengali letter marked by me as Q6 and Q6 (a) with the specimen writing said to be of one Mr. Md. Khurshid alias Pannu marked by me as S12 to S16. The questioned writings when compared with the specimen writings they agree in movement, speed, alignment, slant, pen position, shape, size, spacing, etc. and also in the unconscious individual characteristics of writings such as execution and arrangements of the different letters, strokes and words with some variations which are either natural or the result of the conscious product of the Specimen.
Amongst the agreements, a good number of major and important characteristics of the writer are noted below.
1) The execution of the upper stroke, in most of the cases, it is almost slanted with a straight line commencing from the left side of the vertical stroke. In a few cases, the slanted stroke comes down slightly in the form of an angle (This character is shown in the enlargement marked by a straight line).
2) The execution of the vowel stroke ……….!!2 with a special reference to its finish. This stroke is executed with a normal curve without having any twist at the base. (This character is underlined in the photo enlargements for reference
Page: 573
……
3) The execution of the vowel stroke ……….’ with a prominent loop at the top generally not connected with the letter to which it is applied. (It is also shown in the enlargements) ……………… PW238( partial) documents missing ………….. curve of the letter ………..’ is combined with a vertical stroke at the top of the disputed writings. The writer wrongly spells the word with but such a mistake is also found in the specimen. (Vide S16).
(8) The execution and arrangement of the different letters of the word ………..’ with a special reference to the finish of the letter ……….’ almost at the base (Vide Q6, S12).
(9) The execution of the different letters and strokes of the word ……….’ with a special reference to the position of the stroke which is given over the head of the loop of the letter……….’, (Vide 29, W12).
(10) The wrong spelling of the word ……….’ the writer spells the word with the vowel stroke ………..’ over (Vide Q6. S12).
(11) The execution and combination of the different letters and strokes of the word ………..’ with a special reference to the word “. ……..’. The only variation is found in the execution of the strokes ” applied to the letter ………..’. In the question of writings its applied to the letters ………..’. by a separate stroke but in the specimen it is done in one operation with the letter ……….’ and sometimes in a detached way. (Vide Q6, S4, S14, etc.)
. (12) The execution and combination of the different letters and the strokes of the word ………..’ with a special reference to the execution of the letter ………..’. (Vide 6(a), S12 and 516).
(13) The execution and the arrangement of the different letters and strokes of the word ………..’ with a special reference to the execution of the proper stroke of the letter ……….’ which is done by a simple in word curve. (Vide Q6, S16).
(14) The execution and combination of the different letters of the word ………..’ with a special reference so it’s wrong spelling the writer does not give the stroke to the letter ………..’.(Vide Q6(a), S14).
(15) The execution of the different letters and the strokes of the word ……….’ with a special reference to its execution of the letters and ……….. (Vide Q6(a) and S14).
Page: 574
(16) The execution of the different letters and strokes of the word with a special reference to the commencing of the letter ………..’ and ……….? (Vide Q6(a), S12).
(17) The wrong spelling of the word ………..’ the writer does not give the vowel stroke with ……….’, (Vide Q6, S13).
(18) The execution and arrangement of the different letters of the word ……….’ with special reference to the letter ……….’ vertical stroke of the letter, goes the abnormal upward direction. (Vide Q6 (a).
(19) The execution and arrangement of the different letters of the word ……….’ with a special reference to the execution of the final curve of the letter ……….’ which is done by a separate short stroke. (Vide Q6, S14).
Similarly, the two sets of writings agree in the execution combination of the different letters and strokes appearing in other words also with their special peculiarities without having any fundamental divergence in them. Some to the divergence which may draw the attention of an individual are given below: ……………… PW238 (partial) documents missing…….. by the individuals who wrote the specimen, writings marked S12 to $16, i.e. by Mr. Md. Khurshid Pannu and not any other individuals.
For the purpose of examination and comparison, I had the photographic enlargement of the questioned writings and some of the specimen writings made by our photographic expert and those are attached in a chart. These are those charts now marked as Ext. P.W.238/9 and Ext. P.W.238/10, P.W.238/9 is the enlargement of the questioned writings and P.W.238/10 is the enlargement of the specimen writings. The first page of the Ext. P.W.3/6 was marked by me as Q6. The second page of this Ext. P.W. was marked by me as S11, the first page of that Ext. is P.W.169/27 is marked by me as S12, the next page of that Ext. is marked by me as S13. The page thereafter of that Ext. is marked by me as S14 and the page after that is marked by me as S15 and the page there after is marked by me as $16.
I also examined the questioned writings appearing in a Bengali letter marked by me as Q15 with the specimen writings said to be of one Mr. Mujibur Rahman. Some of them are marked by me as S29 and S30.
Since the specimen writings supplied appear to be executed entirely in a conscious way, proper examination between the two sheets of
Pagee: 575
writings could not be taken up in the absence of routine standard writings of the individual concerned. This is my report I prepared in connection with this examination of the documents now marked as Ext. P.W. 238/11. This report bears my signature as well as that of Mr. Majid Quraishi, Handwriting Expert, and Examiner of Questioned documents. These documents were received by him and were forwarded by him back to the I.O. and that is why he also signed the report. He did not make any examination of this document.
Subsequently, some more documents were sent to me under memo No. 462/S.T. dated 30.8.68 for comparison and opinion by the Chief Prosecution Counsel of this case. The documents received by me were.
(1) One letter in Bengali in blue-sheet of paper and marked by me as W216 and 216(A).
(2) One note book under name of ‘Saeem College File’ containing some Bengali writings on page No. 1 to 16 (Keeping one sheet blank at the beginning) and marked by me as Q17, Q17(A) to Q17(0). The Bengali writings containing at page No.17 and the first 2 words reading at page No. 18 are marked by me as Q18 and Q18(a). The remaining writings appear on page No. 18 and the writings appear on pages 19 to 26 are marked by me as Q19, 19(A) to Q16 (H). Then after keeping one sheet blank, the Note Book contains a line written in Bengali which is marked by me as Q 21.
(3) One piece of paper containing some English writings of both sides and marked by me as Q 20 and Q 20(A).
(4) One File containing some specimen writings in English in 8 sheets of paper said to be of one Amir Hossain Mia.
(5) One File containing some specimen writings mainly in Bengali in 10 sheets of papers said to be of one Mr. Khurshid Pannu.
(6) One File containing some specimen writings in Bengali in 20 sheets of paper said to be of one Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed.
7. One file containing some specimen writings in English in 8 sheets of paper and some specimen writings in Bengali in 5 sheets of paper said to be of one Mr. Noor Mohammad.
8. One file containing some specimen writings in Bengali in five sheets of paper and some specimen writings in English in five sheets of paper said to be of one Mr. Mujibur Rahman.
576 . Record of Proceedings, Agartala Conspiracy
Page:576
9. One file containing some specimen writings in Bengali if five sheets of paper and some specimen writings in English in Eleven sheets in a small diary named ‘Rupali’ said to be of one Mr. A. Samad.
10. One file containing some specimen writings in Bengali in 14 sheets some specimen writings in English in 16 sheets and a diary containing some specimen writings both in English and Bengali said to be of one Lt.Com. Moazzem Hossain.
I examined the documents, made necessary comparison and my opinion is as following:
The writings appearing in the note books are examined inter se and they are found to have been executed by three different individuals. The writings marked by me as Q/17, Q17 (a) to Q 17(0) are executed by one individual. The writings marked Q /18, Q18A and Q21 are executed by another individual and the remaining writings marked Q/19, Q19 (A) to Q/19(H) are executed by a third individual.
The writings marked Q/16, Q16(A), Q/18, Q/18(A) and Q/21 agree with the specimen writings said to be of one Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed, in movement, speed alignment, slant, approximate shape, size, spacing, etc. with some normal variations. They also agree with the individual characteristics of writings such as execution and combination of different letters and strokes which are found common with them without having any fundamental divergence amongst them. Amongst the agreement some of the important individual characteristics of the writings of the individual writers are noted below:
(1) The execution of the vowel stroke in most of the cases. It is executed in two operations. In some cases, it is executed by two slanted strokes one in the form of an acute angle at the top and in some cases the second stroke is executed in the form of an absolute curve keeping open at the top. This character has been marked in Q/16, Q/16(A) Q/18 and in the specimen previously marked as S/4 and S/5, etc.
(2) The peculiar execution of the vowel stroke in most of the cases it is finished by making a re-curve from the base to the top i.e. by compound curve (vide Q/16, Q/16(A), Q/18, S/4, S/5, etc.)
(3) The habit of executing with an unusual long curve (vide Q/16, Q/18, S/4, S/5, etc.)
Page: 577
(4) Execution of the vowel letter the first curve of the letter is finished towards the base (vide the words etc. in Q/16, Q/16(a) Q/19 and A/21 and the words’ In S/4 and S/5, etc.).
(5) The vowel letter is executed in most of the cases with downward curve having embellishment (vide the words in Q/18, Q/18(A), Q/18 and the words, etc. in S/4 and S/6).
(6) Execution of the letter it is executed in most of the cases with a backward curve in the shape of an islet at the base; the finishing hook is also executed in the shape of another islet just above the former islet (vide the words in Q/16, Q/16A, Q/18 and the words, etc. in S/4 and S/5).
(7) The execution of the letter with a special reference to its finish which is done a majority cases by a downward vertical stroke (vide the words’ in Q/16, Q/16(A), Q/18, and the words, etc. in S/4, S/6).
…. PW238 (partial) documents missing Ahmed and marked by me as R-1.
(4) A typed sheet of paper of containing the estimate of income tax containing a routine standard signature said to be of Mr. Kurshiduddin Ahmed and marked by me as R-2.
I examined the documents and made necessary comparison. The specimen writings and signatures marked S-31 and S-32 have been executed in a distorted at conscious way. This will be proved if the specimen are examined inter se. (for reference vide the words ‘Kurshid, Bhabi, Please, Abortion, etc.) The conscious performance of the writer with regard to the specimen will be proved more clearly when the specimen are compared with the routine standard writings marked as R-1.
The specimen and the standard writings do not contain sufficient common materials with the disputed writings and the signatures marked Q-22. However, when the disputed writings and signatures marked Q-22 are compared with the specimen and routine standard writings and signatures marked S-31, S-32, R-1 and R-2, they agree in the execution of some important individual characteristics of writings such as the execution of the capital letter l’ the execution of the letter small ‘s’ the execution and combination of the different letters of the words ‘the’, ‘not’ and ‘any’, position of different crossing, execution of the letters capital ‘B’ and capital ‘R’, the execution and combination of the letters small ‘e’, ‘d’,
Pagee: 578
appearing in the signature, the execution of the letters small ‘h’, ‘p’, ‘h’, etc. with some occasional variation at some places in the specimen. The divergences which are found between the disputed and specimen writings and signatures marked Q-22, S31 and S32 may be due to the conscious product of the specimen supplied. But these divergences could not be explained with the help of the routine standard writings and signatures available. The standard signature reads, “Khurshiduddin Ahmed” where as the questioned signature reads as “Khurshid” (executed in the simplified way) and as such proper comparison could not be undertaken between the questioned writings and signatures and the routine standard writings and signatures. The standard writings marked R-1 containing very little common materials with the disputed writings.
In view of the above facts, I am of the opinion that the writings and signatures marked A-22, S-30, S-31, S-32, R-1 and R-2 might have been executed by the same individual. This is the report now marked as Ext. P.W.238/19 which bears my signature. The letter already marked as Ext. P.W. 163/2 was marked by me as Q-22. The documents R-1 and R-2 referred to my report are now marked as Ext. P.W. 238/20 and P.W. 238/21.
The specimen writings of Khurshiduddin Ahmed taken before the Court was marked by me as S-31 and S-32. It is now marked as Ext. P.W. 238/22 and Ext. P.W. 238/23.
I had photographic enlargement made by our photographic expert under my supervision of the questioned writings which was marked by me as Q-22 and standard routine writings and signatures marked by me as R-1 and R-2. It is now marked as Ext. P.W.238/24.
I also made enlargement through our photographic expert under my supervision of the specimen writings marked by me as S-31 and S-32 which is now marked as Ext. P.W.238/25. ……………… PW238 (partial) documents missing
Page: 579
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
6.1.1969. Record proceedings Present
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman., H.Pk., Chairman. Mr. Justice M.R. Khan S.Pk., Member. Mr. Justice Maksum -ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution: As before. For the Defence: As before. Accused present: As before. Witness on oath: As before.
EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF OF P.W.238, MR. ABDUL KADER CONTINUED
TO MR. T.H. KHAN
I have examined the documents made necessary comparison and my opinion is as follows:
The writings marked Q/23 and Q/23(a) differ from the specimen’s writings of Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed (some of them are marked as S/1. to S/10 previously both in general and individual characteristics of writings in their minutes details including the execution and combination of the different letters and strokes without having any striking agreement in them.
Page: 580
Taking the above features into account I am of opinion that the writings marked Q/23 and Q/23a are not executed by Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed (i.e. by the individual whose specimens were previously marked by me as S/1 to S/10).
The specimen writings of Std. Mujibur Rahman appear to be executed in conscious and disjointed way and in the absence of any routine standard writings of the individual concerned. No proper comparison could be taken up between the disputed writings marked Q/24 and Q/24a and the specimen writings supplied for the purpose of comparison and opinion.
The writings and signature marked by me as Q/25 differ from the specimen writings of Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed (some of them previously marked as S/1 to S/10) both in general and individual characteristics of writings in their minute details including the execution of different letters and strokes without having any striding agreement in them.
Taking the above features into account I am of the opinion that the writings and signature marked Q/25 are not executed by Mr. Sultanuddin Ahmed i.e. by the individual whose specimen have marked by me as S/1 to S/10.
The writings marked Q/26, Q/26a and Q/26b agree with the specimen writings of one Mr. Moazzem Hossain (Vide S/17, S/18 and S/22, etc. previously marked) in movement speed, alignment, slant, pen position, pen pressure, approximate shape, size, spacing etc, and also in the individual characteristics of writing such as execution and arrangement of the different letters and strokes with some natural and minor variations at some places which are not all fundamental in nature.
The fifth page of Ext. P. W. 169/24 was marked by me as S/17. The page thereafter was marked by me as S/18. The third page of this Ext. was marked by me as S/22. During examination took into consideration all other specimen writings of the individual concerned. The letter already marked Ext. P. W. 2/64 was marked by me as Q/26. The next page was marked by me as Q/26a. The reverse of this page was marked by me as Q/26b.
Amongst the agreement, a good number of major and important characteristics of the writer are noted below
Page: 581
(1) The execution of the letter; The letter is executed having its finishing hook almost at the base.
(2) The execution of the letter with special reference to its commencement.
(3) The execution of the letter, the letter is executed in a copy book form in the disputed writings. The final stroke goes downward below the base of the line of writing. Such significant execution of letter is also found in the specimen (vide S/18 and S/22).
(4) The execution of the letter: The lower part of the letter is executed almost in the form of a circle and the upper part is finished to the left.
(5) The special execution of the letter the final loop of the letter is finished almost at the base and goes upward with a flying curve. Sometimes the letter is commenced in a peculiar way with a short stroke (vide Q/26, Q/26b, S/22).
(6) The execution of the vowel stroke with an elongated loop specially were it is not written in one operation with the letter to which it is applied.
(7) The execution of a backward finish vide the words in Q/26, in Q/26b, in S/17 and S/18.
8) The execution of the vowel stroke which is executed with a well shaped curve without having any twist towards its finish.
(9) The nature of the application of the letter is done in one operation (vide the word in Q/26b and the word in S/22).
(10) The commencement of the letter (vide the words in Q/26/a, the word in Q/26b and the word in S/17, the words in S/18, etc.)
(11) The execution of the letter with special reference to its finish. The letter is finished towards the left almost along the base of the line of writings (vide the words in Q/26, in Q/26a, in Q/26b, in S/17 and the word in S/22, etc.)
(12) The execution and combination of the different letters and strokes of the word ( Vide Q/26 and S/18).
(13) The execution and combination of the different letters and strokes of the word ‘ and ” (Vide Q/26b and S/17) etc. All the abovenoted characteristics have been arrow-marked in the enlargements.
Page: 582
Taking the above features into account I am of the opinion that the writings marked A/26, Q/26a and A26/b are executed by Mr. Moazzem Hossain i.e. by the individual some of whose specimen writings are marked by me as S/17, S/18, and S/22).
During the examination, I got the photograph enlargements made by our photographic expert under my supervision of the questioned writings and the specimens are placed in charts. This is the chart prepared of questioned writings now marked Ext. P. W. 238/26. This is the chart of the specimen writings now marked Ext.P.W.238/27. This is another chart of specimen writing of S /23 and S/23a, now marked Ext. P.W. 238/28 along with the specimen writings. This is my report that I prepared in connection with the examination of these documents now marked Ext. P.W. 238/29. This bears my signature.
I also received some documents from Mr. Abdul Khaleque, Spl. Supdt. of police, special Branch, East Pakistan, special Team, under his letter No. 780/ST dated 28.11.68 for examination and opinion. The documents received are as follows:
(1) One Bengali letter addressed to ‘Reza Bhai’ containing some Bengali writings on both sides and marked by me as Q9 and Q/9a. The document already marked Ext. P.W. 27/3 was marked by me as Q/9. The first page of the document already marked Ext. P.W. 27/3, by me as Q/9. The revise of this page was marked by me as Q/9a.
(2) The five sheets of papers containing some specimen writings and signatures said to be of one Mr. Mutalib are marked by me as S/33, S/33a, S/34, S/35, and S.35a. The document marked by me as S/33 is now marked as Ext. P.W. 238/30.
The next page of that exhibit was marked by me as S33(a). The document marked by me as S34 is now marked Ext. P.W.238/31. The next page of that exhibit was marked by me as S35. The page of that exhibit was marked by me as S35. The page thereafter was marked by me as S35(a).
I examined the documents and made the necessary comparisons. The specimen writings and signatures marked S33 to S33 (a) do not appear to be the normal writings of the individual concerned. The writer has executed different letters and strokes in artistic and ornamental way
Page: 583
making them impossible for comparison with natural writings marked Q9 and Q9 (a).
In view of the above facts, no opinion could be formed in regard to their common authorship or otherwise. Some standard writings of the individual concerned in or near about the period of the date of the disputed writings marked Q9, Q9 (a) might have been helpful to form some definite opinion, this is my report which I prepared in this connection now marked Ext. P.W.238/32 which bears my signature.
I obtained photographic enlargements of the questioned writings marked Q9 and Q9 (a) by our photographic expert under my supervision and also photographic enlargements of the specimen writings marked by me as S33 and S34 and they are in one chart now marked Ext. P.W. 238/33.
I passed the LL.B. examination in the year 1960.
Cross -Examination TO SHAH AZIZUR RAHMAN
The books written by Mr. A.S. Osborn and Harrson are taken as authorities on this science of handwriting. I do not remember who wrote the introduction to Osborn’s book, I do not consider Wigmore as an authority on this subject. I have not read the book ‘Forged and Suspected Documents’ by Arther J. Quick. I have also not read the book ‘Scientific Examination of Hand- writings’ by Arther Mitchel. I have also not read the book ‘Identification of Handwritings’ by C.D. Lee. I have not read the book on Forgery by Deniel Ams. I have not read the book ‘Detection of Forgery’ by Doughlus Blackburn. I had studied the book ‘Contested Documents ‘ by F. Brewster. I have not studied the book ‘Analysis of Writings’ by H.A. Jacobi. I have not studied the book ‘Law of Disputed Documents’ by Newton Baker. I have not read the book ‘Scientific Examination of Questioned Documents’ by Ordway Hilton, I consider Wilson as an authority in this subject. I have not studied the book ‘Expert’s Testimony’ by Rosers. I have not studied the book “Experts Opinion’s” by Lawson. I do not accept Charles and Hardles as authorities. Yes, I agree that the best standards for comparison are those
Page: 584
writings, which are written in the normal course near about the date of the questioned writings, provided they contain common materials with the disputed writings. Specimen writings taken in court are sometimes good standard writings for comparison, if they contain common materials with the disputed documents and if they are not written in very much conscious effort. I did not call for any standard writings in this case. In arriving at the conclusion, it is necessary to take into consideration the general characteristics as well as the individual characteristics of the writings of an individual. General Characteristics, as well as an individual characteristic, have been classified in Osborn’s book ‘Questioned Documents’. General characteristics appearing on the writing is also general characteristics of the writings. I have not mentioned in my report that I have taken into consideration the general appearance of the writings. I also consider that the system of writings is also a general characteristic of the writings. In our country, the systems can be classified as vertical, angular and oval systems. I did not specifically mention any system of writings in my report but I took them into consideration. I have not given any specific illustration or any slant in my evidence and report. I did not give any illustration of the spacing in my opinion. I did not specifically mention a proportion of letters to each other in my opinion, but I considered it. I did not give any illustration of pen lift in my opinion. I have not given any illustration of any deficient stroke in my opinion. Nor did I mention any illustration regarding shading of letters or line quality. I have not given any illustration about line quality because that is very important only in the case of detecting forgery. I, however, took the same into consideration. There are two types of line quality, mainly, normal line quality and defective line quality. It is true that Osborn has classified the line quality into 3 categories, namely, Smooth, rough or irregular. Smooth and rough, however, come into the category of normal quality and irregular comes within the category of defective quality. I have not given any illustration of pen pressure in my opinion, as no specific illustration can be given about any pen pressure. I have not mentioned in my opinion as to what kind of paper and what kind of ink was used in the writings. Nor did I
Page: 585
mention the instruments that were used by the writers. I have no colourmicroscope in my laboratory. I have not mentioned the age of the questioned writings in my opinion. I did not give any specific illustration of alignments, but I took it into consideration. I do not consider lineal to be the system of writings in our country. There are numerous types of execution of letters in the writings. I agree that the execution can be laboured, slow, drawn, deliberate, average or rapid. I did not specifically mention the types of executions in my opinion as stated just now. I have not mentioned specifically the instruments I have used in arriving at the conclusions. I, however, used magnifying glass, flash-light, hand magnifier, instrument box and magnifying glass with illuminated light. I do not agree with the observation that no opinion should be given and until enlargement of the transmitted photographic of the questioned writings have been made. (The witness was handed over the OSBORN’s book and asked to refer to page 288. The witness on perusing the page, answers): This observation refers to the cases of forgeries only and not about the general writings and even in the cases of forgeries it is not always correct. After examining the documents, I came to the conclusion that this is not an instance of a case of forgery. I did not specifically note this fact in this report. I am not aware of the instrument of middle pointed parallel divider. I have read about the instruments, specially Micrometer Caliper but I have not seen this myself. I do not agree that without the help of these above instruments it is not possible to arrive at correct findings about the handwriting. I have heard about the instrument protractor. In this case also I used this instrument as a part of the instrument box. I have heard of the instrument Transmitted light table which is one kind of light. I have heard of transmitted light table. I have not got that in my laboratory. In my opinion, it is not absolutely necessary to use transmitted light table for arriving at a conclusion regarding the hand writings. I have heard of Stenographic photographic but I have not seen this instrument. I have not used comparison microscope nor I have got it in my laboratory. The habit in writing means the habit that is acquired by the writer through practice. I have judged the pen pressure of the writer by means of observation. I have not given any
Page: 586
illustration of any pen pressure in my opinion. I agree that the pen pressure is judged from the width of the strokes, incur of the strokes, edges of the strokes and gradation of the strokes. These factors I have not specifically mentioned my report. Pen-position and pen-pressure are two distinct elements but the two are inter-related. I did consider the location of shading in the writings. But I did not mention that in my report. I do not agree that shading is an important aspect of hand-writing observation. It has however got some value in assessing the opinion relating to the authorship of the hand-writings. By shading, I mean, the variation of the width of the stroke from beginning to the end. I have not indicated the location of the shade on the photograph but I took the same into consideration. I did not indicate specifically the pen-position in the photograph. I have not mentioned in my report as to how I have determined the pen-position in question as to the specimen writings. Penposition is determined by means of calculation. It is determined by the position of the pen on the paper in relation to the inclusion of the base line. I agree to the observation that it is determined by the angle of the pen to the line of the writing. In my opinion, it is the same thing I have explained. This also includes the angle of the pen to the surface of the paper and the pressure on either side of the nib. In this case, I did not examine the ink and the paper of the questioned, and the specimen writings I have not drawn a base line in my enlargement but I have measured it. I have measured the angle of the pen to the line of writing but I have not mentioned it in my opinion. By the line of writing, I mean, the surface of the paper and it is the same thing. I agree that the alignment of the writing is a very important element. I have not given any illustration in my report but I have taken it into consideration. I did not mention the average slant of the writings in my opinion but I measured it. I examined the spacing of the letters but did not mention it in my report, not did I illustrate it in my opinion. I did measure the relating size and proportion of the different letters of the writings but I did not give illustration of that in my report. This I measured with the help of a scale. I have not marked them with the photograph.
Page: 587
It is correct that in my report Ext. P.W.238/11, I have not specifically mentioned the pen-pressure but I took it into consideration and it is covered by the word, etc. Within execution, I would include the commencement and the finish of the letters taken together and nothing else. It is not correct that all characteristics of writing are included within the term execution. Sizing and spacing are included within the execution. Arrangement would be included in the execution of a letter but not alignment. Curves and movement would be included in the execution of a letter. The slant is also included therein. Style is also included in it. I have discussed some variations in the writings of Lt.Com. Moazzem Hossain in my report Ext. P.W.238/11. The variations discussed relate to spelling of some words and nothing else. Again said I have also discussed the execution and relative position of some letters in words in respect of variations. It is not correct to say that my definition of ‘execution’ is incorrect. I have not discussed the variations in respect of elements that do not fall within execution. The definition I have given of execution is based on my opinion which I consider to me asked by every authority. The authorities that I follow are Osborn and Harrison.
When the execution of different letters made in a word is taken into consideration, the arrangement falls within individual characteristics of writings. According to my report, execution is an individual characteristic. The arrangement may be both under general and individual characteristics. In my report, it is mentioned as under individual characteristics. Individual characteristics of writings may be numerous and it will depend upon each letter and stroke used in the writings. The other individual characteristics of writing are the relative position of the different letters and strokes appearing in the writings. These are the characteristics which can be solely termed as individual characteristics and no more. Under ‘etc.’ in detailing the categories of general characteristics I would include pen pressure, shading, pen scope, embellishment, arrangement, and systems. I cannot say if there are different Schools of hand-writing examination. Style would be included in general characteristics, Direction in the Case of a single stroke would be included in individual characteristics and sometimes the combination
Page: 588
of one stroke with another also come under individual characteristics of writings. When it is taken as a whole considering all the letters and strokes of a word, that would fall under general characteristics, I did not consider it necessary to give illustrations of speed alignment, slant pen position, shape, size, etc. but I took them into consideration. I have not, however, mentioned in my report that I considered these elements. I took the measurement of the letters, words, and strokes.
It is not a fact that the word ‘Ulka’ in the questioned document is similar in size than the same word in the specimen except for the natural variation. Their size is not exactly equal. The word is slightly bigger in the questioned writing than that in the specimen. It is correct that the questioned writings are in different shading than the specimen writings. The quality of paper on which they were written, however, is almost the same. The quality of ink of the two writings is slightly different. The total space covered by the writing of this code name in the specimen writing is slightly bigger than the space occupied in the questioned writing. I cannot exactly say whether the questioned writing is in ordinary pen as distinguished from the fountain pen. I cannot say if the ink in the writing of the questioned document is washable. The space between the words ‘Alo’ and ‘Ulka’ in the questioned and specimen writings slightly differs, the bigger space being in the specimen writing. The disputed writings in the case of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain are in my opinion with the same pen and in the same ink. I cannot say whether all these writings were executed at the same time. An expert cannot give categorical opinion about the age of the writing. He can suggest what the age may be; I cannot say if it is possible to determine the quality of the ink and the paper by chemical examination. I do not agree with the suggestion of the learned Counsel that I have given my report abruptly without considering any basis and authorities and that it is inconclusive and incompetent and only a layman’s opinion.
TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
The words loop and bulb mean the same thing sometimes it is described as a loop and sometimes it is described as a bulb. It is not
Page: 589
correct to say that when there is no vacant space in a loop then it is called a bulb. It may be that the last stroke of the letter of ‘#’ (ka) is combined with the next letter that is why it is more horizontal than vertical. It is not a very common tendency to combine these two letters. The well shaped curve mentioned in my ground No. 2 relating to Ext. P.W. 238/11 is not a common characteristic of the writers. This is a peculiar trail of this writer. I cannot say that a similar curve will not be seen in any other writer.
The peculiarity I have spoken in the ground No. 3 of my evidence is that the letter cap (Ga) is written in separate operations. It is a special peculiarity of this writer. I cannot say whether I have seen this peculiarity in any other writings. In some cases, it may be that the letter csgy? (Ga) is written in two operations instead of one. It is not a fact that in a majority of cases this is written in two operations. The letter ‘T’ (Gha) has been written with a vertical stroke and it is a very peculiar characteristic of this writer and not commonly shared by others. I have not mentioned this special peculiarity of the writer in my opinion. In majority of cases the letter G’ (Bargya-ja) is written in a simplified form. The habit of finishing the letter ‘ t’ (Ta) by a slanted stroke and also with a hook with the tendency of making a hook is not common habit. I cannot say whether this habit would be also existing with other writers or not. I have not come across of this erratic habit of the writing of the letter ‘& ‘(Ta) in other writers. I have said in my opinion that this is an erratic habit of the writer. The general habit of writing the letter, (Ta) is to write in one way and not in this erratic way, that is not in the way mentioned in Paragraph 6, that is to say, not in combination of these three ways. This tendency depends on the habit of the writer and not on the mood of the writer. As far as I have known this combination of three different ways is not available in other writers. I have seen others also writing the letter with a finish to the left, but in the present case it was done by the writer in a peculiar way. I did not mention this peculiarity in my report or in my evidence.
The peculiarity I noticed is that the lower part of the letter has come circular way or is executed almost by a circular stroke and sometimes going towards left by a slanted stroke going downwards a little. In
Page: 590
another place in S-17the lower part of the same letter is executed exactly in a similar manner and it is finished towards left with the tendency of making a loop. This is the peculiar tendency found in the waiter and not shared commonly by others. The writings of the letter in a specified way is common habit but the way in which this letter has been written in the questioned as well as in the specimen document is not common. The peculiarity is that at the base some time an angle is made and sometimes a stroke similar to an angle at the beginning of the letter and then comes downwards and meets with the vertical stroke going upwards in some cases. I have not mentioned these peculiarities in my opinion and report, this peculiarity is not commonly charged by others but may be shared by a few. The characteristic of finishing the letter is not a common character stall in the way it is done here. The peculiarity consists of a short incurve stroke at the commencement, sometimes which is not generally shared by others. So far as I am concerned I have not seen this peculiarity in any other writer. I have mentioned the peculiarity in my report and evidence but I have not described it. The peculiarity of the letter has been mentioned by me and has commenced with a short circular stroke. This is the peculiarity not generally shared by others. In the items No. 9 & 10 I have only refereed to the questioned writing but the same are to be found in the specimen writings and that I have converted by the word ‘etc’. I have underlined them in the enlargement. In ground No. 9 & 10 I have not mentioned specimen writings. (In ground No. 9 &20 is actually mentioned). The peculiarity of which I have mentioned with regard to the letter is the peculiarity which is not generally shared by others. I have not specified the peculiarity with regard to the letter with reference to the word in my evidence and in my report. The peculiarity consists in the finishing stroke of the letter which is done here in most of the cases in a circular way. This is the peculiarity not shared generally by others. I have not mentioned this fact in my evidence or in my report. The peculiarity of having elongated loop with the letter ………..’ is the peculiarity not generally shared by others. In other cases the loop will be either shorter or longer but not in the case as it is here. The elongation here is of medium size.
Page: 591
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
7.1.1969.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PRESENT
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman.
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S. pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution… As before.
For the Defence… As before.
Accused present… As before.
Witness on oath… As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.238, MR. ABDUL KADER CONTINUED TO MR. NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
I agree with OSBORN, that if an error is to be avoided then a basic fact that must constantly be kept in mind in an investigation of the authorship of writing is that hand-writing by different writers in the same language and especially those following the same system of writing are bound to resemble each other in certain ways. I agree that resemblances and differences should both be evaluated and given proper weight. I did not notice any other differences in the writings examined by me which may be of fundamental nature besides those which I have deposed to in this case. It is not correct that the text which was dictated to the accused for specimen writing was prepared by me. The specimen writing was not
Page: 592
taken according to my suggestion. The names and the code names given at page marked P.W.3/18 in the diary do occur in the specimen writings repeatedly.
The word “fal66′ in the specimen writing as given in the enlargement photograph, this is marked Ext. P.W.238/4 begins with ‘ই’-কার and the upper stroke of ‘ই’-কার commenced with a very short stroke and not with a hook. It is not a fully curved stroke but it is very slightly curved. In the questioned writing also there is a similar commencement with natural variation. The upper stroke of the same ‘ই’-কার in the specimen writing is straight and so it is in the questioned writing but with natural variation. I do not agree that in the questioned writing it is a curve, I would not describe it even as a slight curve. There is a slight curve, however, in the questioned writing. In both the questioned as well as the specimen writings it comes downwards. In the specimen writing the last stroke of ‘ই’-কার comes down slightly along the line and there is a similar tendency of coming down in the disputed writing as in the specimen writing and it has got a similar tendency.
I do not agree that the letter in this word in the specimen writing and the vowel stroke in the next letter *4-717′ are written in two operations. They are written in the same operation. The bar above the letter in this word in the specimen writing is separate. In the questioned writing, however, the bar and the letter w’ are executed in one operation. In the specimen writing the letter ‘5 is in the copy book form. In the questioned writing in this word, however, it is in the simplified form. The vowel stroke *9-111 of the letter G’ in the specimen writing is a curve. It goes and the first curve of the letter ‘G’. In the questioned writing in the same word, however, it is not a curve but it has a tendency of a curve. In the questioned writing this stroke goes below the base line. The end of ‘G’ in the questioned writing is executed in one operation and in the specimen writing the end stroke has been executed in another operation separately but touching the former stroke. The head stroke of the letter ‘i’ in Q/1 has been executed separately and similarly, the head stroke of the same letter has been executed in S/25 separately. The dash in the sample writing is slightly longer than in the questioned writing.
Page: 593
The gap in the questioned writing is slightly bigger than that in the specimen writing. In the specimen writing the commencement of the letter sy in word ‘onlaent is in the shape of almost a circular nature and in the questioned writing it is a complete circle which may be described as almost a loop. In the questioned writing the slanted stroke after the letter O in the word “STOTI’ goes to the left and then comes down and in the specimen writing it is a clear angle coming down. In the disputed writing the final stroke of the letter 7 goes to the left then to the right and then comes down slightly. In the specimen writing at the same place it is not combined in the same way with the head stroke of the letter 7 In the specimen writing it comes down simply. The vertical stroke of cont of the word oot in the questioned writing is executed separately and in the specimen writing it is also executed by separate stroke but they have joined. The upper stroke of the vowel -7|’ appearing in the word for 487 in the questioned writing is of circular nature of a curve. It is not absolutely circular. The letter ‘T’ is joined with the letter 7′ appearing in the questioned writing in the word fasti’. They are not executed in one stroke. In the specimen these two letters are not joint but are separate.
The upper stroke of ‘s appearing in the word wool in Q/1 is separate from the next stroke. In the specimen writing, they are joint but done by the separate stroke. The letters 7 and 7 appearing in the word gaat in Q/1 have been executed desperately and in the specimen writing with a gap between them. In the specimen writing both these letters are compound. It is correct that the letters and in the questioned writing in Q/1 have been written in parallel line.
In the sample writing the letter, a (la) and (Ka) have been joined together i.e. after the letter F (Ka) the letter 7 (Ka) is joined below the letter 77′ (la).
In Ql the letter “Eyl-play after the letter 1 (ma) in the word (Mozammel) has been joined together. In the sample writings, the vowel stroke *-713′ after the vertical stroke of the letter has also been joined together and has been executed in the same operation as in Q17. In Q1 at the bottom there is a loop but without making any gap in the midst of it. In the specimen writing there is a loop with a gap inside. I find in Osborn
Page: 594
at page 260 that Osborn mentioned the loop and bulb separately, but he has not drawn any distinction between the two. The reason is that they are of the same nature. In the illustration, however, on this page of Osborn it appears that he considers that the loop is one with a gap inside, but the bulb has no such gap. I do not agree, however, that there is any appreciable difference between loop and bulb inspite of this separate illustration in Osborn. I cannot cite any authority which says that they are identical. The loop in Q1 appearing in the letter ‘G’ (ja) is almost circular. In the specimen it is slightly elliptical. In Ql the vertical stroke of the letter “7′ (ma) appearing in the word “Gaya’ (Mozammel) is almost vertical. In the sample writing in S25 the vertical stroke has got head stroke. The head stroke of the letter (la) in Ql appearing in the word Mozammel is on both sides of the vertical of this letter. In S25 it is only on the right side. But it is on the top as in the questioned writing.
In Q1 the letter l’ in the word opga 8 is executed in an almost circular way. In S 25 the same letter in the word (Tuheen) has also been executed in a circular manner. The end stroke goes upwards in both these writings. In Q1 the vowel stroke 3-711′ of the letter 3′ (ha) appearing in the word ‘getal (Tuheen) is executed by an elongated loop but slightly circular. In S25 the same vowel stroke 3-711′ appearing in the word Tuheen is almost similar. In Q1 the vowel stroke -l’ of the letter (ha) in the word ‘geta’ (Tuheen) does not cross the vertical stroke but the vertical stroke going downwards goes again upwards and finishes after crossing that vertical stroke. In S25 the 37-71′ is executed in the same way except that the vertical stroke going downwards does not go upwards again crossing the vertical stroke.
In the word ‘potra’ in Q1 the letter ‘ has a vertical line on the top which goes to the right. In S25 the same vertical line goes to the left and them goes to the right. When going to the right it goes slightly beyond the vertical line. In the word ……….’in Q1 the letter ……….’ commences almost with a circular stroke. It has a bulb at the top. There is a loop at the top S25. In the same word, the letter first commenced with a circular stroke and then he stopped and again began with an elongated stroke in S25. In S25 there is no bulb. In Q1 the letters ………..’ and ………..’ are
Page: 595
combined together. In S25 also they are combined, not exactly in a similar way but in S25 the head stroke goes by a slanted stroke. In S25 the letters ………..? and ……….’ are joined. In S25 the base of ……….? and ……….’ are separate but the top is joined. In Ql the letters ………..’ and ………. are joined. In Ql the letter ……….’ is covered by the letter ……….’ in the finishing stroke. In S25 the vertical stroke and the head stroke make an angle of the letter ……….’. In Ql there is no angle but it is almost circular. In Q1 the letter ………..’ is almost circular in Shape appearing in the word ……….’. In S25 the same letter ……….’ in the word ………. also has been executed in a circular way though in a slightly different manner.
In S25 the vowel ………..’ after the letter ………..’ is a vertical stroke. In QI, it is a curved line with a bulb.
In Q1 the letter ………..’in the word ………..’ commences with a very sort slanted stroke and then makes a curve. In S25 the same letter commences with a longer slanted line and it went downward at the end line. In Q1 the letter ……….’ has been executed in one operation. In S25 the same letter ………’ has been executed in two operations in a copy-book-form. In Q1 the letter is in the word is triangular. In S25 it is almost in the circular. In Q1 the letter ………..’ is almost in a copy book-form. In S25 it is in a simplified from. In Q1, the letter ………..’ has a stroke to the right. It is done in a copybook-form. In S25 the bulb is to the left and not to the right, It is done in the simplified form. In QI, in the word ……….’ the vowel ………..’ begins from the top of the letter ………..’ In Q1 the vowel ………..’ to the letter ……….’ begins at the base whereas in S25 the vowel ……….’ comes down from the top combined with the vertical stroke ………..?..
In Q1, the letter ……….’ in the word ……….’ begins with a short slanted stroke but not a circular stroke. The commencement of the letter ……….’ is in one line. In S25 the commencing vertical stroke of the same letter ………..’ makes an angle with the subsequent stroke. In Q1 the vowel stroke ………..’ appearing in the word ……….’ is separate from the letter ……….?. In S25 there is no such gap.
In Q1 in the word ………..’ the letter ………’ has got two short bulbs. In S25 there are also two bulbs but bigger in size. In S25 there is a loop
Page: 596
and a bulb in the letter ……….’in the word ……….’ In Ql in the letter I in the word it has been executed in a simplified form. In S25 the same is executed in a copy-book-form.
In Q/l the letter in the word is executed in a triangular form. In S25 the same is executed almost in a circular way. In Q1 it is in a copy -book -form whereas in S25 it is in a simplified form.
In Q/1 the loop in the letter ………..’in the word ………..’ is one the left and there is a bulb to the right. In S/25 the reverse is the case.
The letter ………..’ in the word ………..’ in Q/l is executed in a triangular form. In S/25 the same letter ………’ is almost triangular. In S/25 the letter ………..’in the word ………..’ has a loop at the top. There is no such loop in the corresponding letter in Q/1. The letter ……….’ in Q/1 in the same word is executed in the copy book form. In S/25 the same is executed in a simplified form to some extent.
In Q/1 in the word ………..’ the ………..’ for the letter ………..’ is almost a loop. The loop is slightly circular. The same ……….’in S/25 is also circular but slightly elongated. I the vowel stroke ………..’ after the letter ……….’ there is no loop in the word ………..’in Q/1. In S/25 the same ……….’ has a slight loop to the right of the vertical stroke. IN Q/1 the same vowel stroke ………’ has some over-writing. In S/25 there is no such overwriting. In Q/1 in the letter ……….. there is a bulb joining the two. In S/26 the same letter has a loop.
TO COURT
The over-writing in the in the ………..’ word ………..’in Q/1 cannot be definitely said to have been done in one operation along with the letter ……….’ as there is over-writing.
TO KHAN BAHADUR NAZIRUDDIN AHMED
In Q/1 the letter ………..’ in the word ………..’ begins from the left then comes to the right, then goes downward and then there is a loop. It is in the simplified form. The same letter appearing in S/25 also commences from left, goes to the right then comes down ward and then forms a loop. The first stroke in S/25 in the letter ………..’in the same
Page: 597
word is not circular. The second portion of the letter ………..’ in the word ………..’ is slightly curved to the right in Q/1. In S/25 the same is also a curve. In S/25 the curve is more prominent.
In Q/1 the letters ……….’ and ……….’in the word ……….’ are in one operation. In S/25 these two letters are separate. The letter ……….. in Q/1 in the word ……….’ begins with a stroke from the left. In S/25 it is not so. The letter in Q/1 there is a prominent loop where as there is no such loop in the same letter in S/25. The letter ………..’in Q/1 has been executed in a simplified form and in S/25 the same has been executed in a copybook form.
In Q/l in the letter ……….’ in the word ………’ there is a bulb at the bottom, In S/25 there is a loop at the bottom in the same letter. In Q/1 after the letter ………..’ in the word ………. there is a separate stroke apart from the letter. In S/25 there is no such thing. In Q/1 the vowel stroke ……….. with the letter ………..’ is combined in on operation but it is not so in S/25.
In Q/l the letter ……….’ in the word ……….’ is triangular in form. In S/25 the same letter is almost circular. In Q/1 the same letter is in copy book form except the dot below it. But in S/25 the same is in a simplified form. In Q/1 there is a dash after the letter ………..’ in the word “.
………..” with a clear gap. In S/25 there is no such stroke.
NOTE
The cross-examination was conducted with the help of photographic enlargement.
In the letter ……….’ in the third paragraph of the third sheet of Ext P.W.238/1, there is one bulb. In S/25 in the same letter in the same word, there is a loop. The same letter in the same word in the third sheet of Ext. P.W.238/1 there is a bulb joining the two portions.
This particular series of photographs relating to Moazzem Hossain’s writings were examined by me from 13.4.68 to 21.4.68. I noticed these peculiarities, as pointed out by the learned defence counsel during my examination of the documents. But I did not mention them in my opinion, as I did not consider them fundamental. Whether difference is fundamental or not depends upon the very nature of it.
Page: 598
SPECIALTRIBUNAL
8.1.1969.
Present
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Chairman.
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan S.pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution …… As before. For the Defence….. As before. Accused present…… As before. Witness on oath …….As before.
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF P.W.238, MR. ABDUL KADER CONTINUED
TO Mr. Naziruddin Ahmed
It is not correct to say that I did not like to show the differences and dissimilarities which have been pointed out by the learned Counsel and as such I did not mention them in my opinion. In S3 the letter ………..’ in the word ………..’ ‘(Amader)’ begins with a line without bulb. In Q4 the same letter of the same word begins with a loop. The final stroke of the letter
….’ in the word ………..? (Amader) goes downward. In Q4 in the same line, it is also finished downward, but there is a short dot to the left not connected with downward stroke. In S3 after the circular stroke of the letter ………..’ the next stroke begins from downward with a very short
Page: 599
stroke and then makes an angle and them goes in a slanted way and the vertical stroke is done in one operation with it in the word ‘(Amader)’. In S3 the stroke following the first oval stroke that is the second stroke in the letter ………..’slightly touches the oval stroke. In Q4 there is not angle at the beginning and there is a gap between the two strokes. The first vertical stroke of the letter ……….’in S3 is connected with the previous stroke. In Q4 it is not joined with the upper stroke. The letter ……….? (ma) in S3 commences with an incurve stroke in the word ………..’ (Amader). It is almost like a loop. In the same letter in the same word in Q4 there is a bulb. In S3 the next stroke appearing in the word (Amader) comes downward with a slanted stroke to the letter ……….’. In Q4 it is almost of a similar nature and the same does not go to the right. The first commencing stroke of the letter ………..’ (Ma) in Q4 in the word’ (Amader) goes to the right with a slight curve. In S3 the lower part of the letter ……….’ (Ma) in the same word is a curvature. The curvature and the vertical stroke made an angle. In Q4 there is also curvature of the same mark and they also make an angle with the vertical stroke. It is not a fact that the curvature in S3 is very pronounced and that it is not so in Q4. In S3 the first vertical stroke of the letter ……….’ of the same word and the second vertical stroke are almost in the same alignment. The same is the case in Q4 also. This is one of the words mentioned in the illustration. This is one of the words I selected for comparison amongst others. In S3 the letter ………..’ appearing in the word ……….’ ‘(Ager)’ is triangular in form. In Q3 the same letter in the same word is almost circular.
This is one of the words selected by me for comparison. In Q4 the vowel stroke ………..’ and the letters ………..’ in the word ………..’ is executed in one operation. In S2 they are in a separate operation. In Q4 the vertical stroke of the letter ………..’ in the same word and the upper stroke are done in two operations. But in S2 they are executed in one operation. In Q4 the vertical stroke of has got no loop but in S2 there is one loop. In Q4 the first curve of the letter and the next slanted stroke are not executed in one operation but one touches with the other slightly. In S5 in the same word they are entirely separate. In Q4 in the word
Page: 600
……….’ the vowel stroke ……….’ begins with a slanted stroke and then it is finished with a semi-circular keeping open at the top. The same vowel stroke ………..’ in the word ………. makes an angle at the top and comes downwards slightly. In S7 the vertical stroke ……….’ in the word ……….’ is separated from the subsequent stroke. It has formed an angle at the top. In Q8 the same is finished with a circular stroke keeping open at the top. In S7 the letter ……….’in the same word is executed almost in a copy book form. In Q8 the same letter in the same word has been executed in ornamental and simplified form, In S7 the upper vowel stroke applied to the letter………..’ finished towards down. In Q8 the same is upward. These are some of the words which I selected for comparison.
I did not file the photographic chart while submitting the report. I brought it with me for pleading before the Court at the time of deposition. In Q6 the letter ‘M’ appearing in the word ‘My’ begins with a horizontal short stroke then goes upward with a vertical stroke. In S12, the horizontal stroke in the same letter of the same word is omitted. In Q6 below the word ‘SB’ there is a horizontal stroke. In S12 there is no such horizontal stroke. In S13 and S14 also in the same word, there is no such horizontal stroke.
In 26 the letter ………..’ appearing in the word ………..’ is almost triangular and in copy-book form. In S12 the same is almost circular and in simplified form. In S13 and S14 the same letter in the same word is in simplified form. In Q6 the letter ………..’ in the word ……….? looks like ………..’ excluding the vertical and the horizontal stroke. In S12 the same does not look like ……….’. The first stroke and the second stroke are executed in separate operations.
In Q6 the word ………..’ has been spelled in a different way from that of the same word in S12 and S13. In S13 the spelling is still different from S12. In 26(a) the last vertical stroke of the letter ………..’ which is done here almost by a loop is separated from the former part and this is also in the word ………..’. But in S16 they are joined in the same word. In Q6 (a) the last letter ………..’ in the word ……….’ is almost triangular in form and
Page: 601
almost in copy-book form. In S16 the same letter in the same word is almost circular and in simplified form.
In Q/6a the word ………..’ has been spelt with ………..’ as the first letter. In S/14, S/15 and S/16, the same word has been spelt with the letter ……….’ but in S/15 the first letter contains correction. The writer was about to write ……….’ and then he has written ……..
In the letter ………..’in /15 in the word ……….. it contains correction. It does not appear to me that the letter ………..’ is written by the writer in this peculiar way and does not contain correction. In Q/6a the letter ‘Y’ in the word, ‘Yours’ has been executed in one operation. The same letter in the same word in S/14 is also written in one operation but there is some failure of ink at the loop. The letter ‘Y’ Q/6a all the letters ‘ours’ are executed almost in a different from the same letters in S/14.
TO KHAN BAHADUR MD. ISMAIL
I did not make a selection of words with respect to each respect for each and every document I examined. The basis of my selection was the presence of important and major characteristics of writing in the words selected. I made notes at the time of selecting them, after incorporating those notes in my original report I destroyed them (The witness was handed over a piece of paper by the learned defence Counsel and was asked to write a few lines in Bengali on them. After the witness completed the same then he was requested to select the characteristics of the letters in that writing. The witness did so by underlining the letters. The letters marked by me represent the fundamental characteristics and the rest do not. The paper is now marked Ext. DD (1)/1. I call them the fundamental characteristics of writing because they represent the special features of my writing. I call them special features of my writing because that is not commonly shared by others but some may write like that. The witness has dictated the same lines of Ext. DD (1)/1 and was asked to write them again in another sheet of paper. The witness did so. This paper is now marked Ext. DD (1)/2. The fundamental characteristics of writing do not generally very but there might be slight natural variations at times. Natural variations
Page: 602
are those variations which are found generally in the genuine different writings of the same person. I do not find any fundamental difference in the two words written in those two documents. It is not correct to say that I did not mention the differences as pointed out to me by the defence Counsel because that might help the defence.
TO MR. ATAUR RAHMAN KHAN
I come from Khulna. I entered police service in the year 1950 as a direct Cadet. I read the proceedings of this case at times in the newspapers but did not do so regularly.
I did not know from the newspaper reports of the proceedings of this Court that some of the witnesses examined have talked of some documents executed by some accused. I did see in the newspaper reports that some documents have been exhibited in this Court, but I was not aware what the natures of the documents were. I have not given specific illustration with regard to the divergences between Q22, S31, S32, R1 and R2 in my report. The divergences found are due to conscious and deliberate writing and not natural in these documents. In the communication which I received R1 and R2 are described as standard writings and I took them as such. The name of the author is not written in RI. No endorsement a pear in R1 and R2 showing as to where from they have been sized or recovered. The letter ‘K’ in the word ‘Khurshid’ in Q22 and in the word ‘K.U. Ahmed in R2 differs in the commencement but agrees in the finish. In R2 the letter ‘K’ is written with an ornamental loop in the beginning. The words ‘Kurshid’, ‘Bhabi’, ‘abortion’, ‘Please’ are written differently in the same documents S31. I have not given illustration of the differences in these words in this document in my report. It is correct that R1 is written in pencil and not in ink. This fact is not mentioned in my report. It is also written on a very thick paper. It is a glazed piece of paper. The papers used for S31 and S32 are different from the paper used for R1. There will be slight variation in the writing of a person if one writes in a different position placing the paper on the table, on the ground or on the knees. The letter ‘D’ in Rl in the word
Page: 603
‘Dacca’ and the letter ‘D’ in the word ‘Dock’ in Q22 is written in different forms, but they are not fundamentally different. R1 is a formal ‘ D8 and there is no individual characteristic in it. Formal means a copy book form. In Q22 the letter ‘D’ is written in a simplified form. In the natural course there will be difference between a copy book form of D’ and the ‘D’ written in a natural way. If the same letter is executed in two different ways by the same writer in the natural course of his writing the divergence would be described as fundamental. I do not regard the figure ‘5’ in R1 to be fundamentally different from the same figure in Q22. They are not in the same form and style but only with a little exception in the finish. The form in which this letter is written in R1 and Q22 would not be ordinary written by all writers but may be written by some. Only in the finish this digit ‘5’ is different from the ordinary form (The witness has put red mark under the finish of the digit ‘5’ of the document and also the letter ‘D’. It is not a fact that the definition of fundamental I have given is arbitrary. The letters ‘th’ in the word ‘Jagannath’ in R1 and in the word ‘Mother in Q22 are written with a slight difference. My answer is the same in regard to the letters ‘th’ in the word ‘with’ in Q22. The letter ‘S8 in the word ‘Shaha’ in R1 and the same letter in the word ‘Stone’ in Q22 are slightly different. In ‘Stone’ it is executed in a detached way. In 531 there is a capital letter ‘L’ in the word ‘In’ and there is a single letter standing by itself in Q22. In execution of these two ‘I’ in two words is almost same except that in the word ‘In’ the l’ is connected with the following letter ‘n’ whereas in the other document it stands alone. I do not find any letter ‘I’ standing by itself in S/31 anywhere. In S/31 the word ‘Bhabi’ contains the last but one letter as ‘V’ and in Q22 the same word is spelled with the letter ‘B’. In S/31 the word ‘Bhabi’ has been written in four places. In the first word ‘Bhabi’ occurring there in there is a correction and it can be read both ‘V’ and ‘B’.
TO MR. ZAHIRUDDIN
Designs, size, proportions, slant, shading, vigour, angularity, etc. are known as common system qualities. I agree with OSBORN that no
Page: 604
different opinion should be formed on the basis of only the common characteristics when a specimen is taken from a writer in order to compare with disputed writing sometimes the peculiarity of the writing may be disguised in the conscious writing and sometimes it is not. Standard Writing would be necessary in the case of very much conscious writing. In the case of Lt. Commander Moazzem Hossain, I did not call for the standard writing. I did not consider it necessary to do so. I do not agree with the sentence read out to me from OSBORN that no final and definite opinion should be given regarding a disputed writing without finally comparing it with proved genuine writing. I also do not agree with the sentence of OSBORN that a positive opinion is not given by a competent witness unless an adequate amount of standard writing for comparison is supplied.
NOTE: (These quotations were from OSBORN at pages 261 and 364 of the 2nd Edition).
I agree that if writings of different person’s belongings to the same class with similar educational qualifications are placed before me they might have some similarities but they would still differ in some fundamental characteristics in writings. I do not agree with the opinion of OSBORN read out to me from page 262, Second Edition that two writings in the same language must have inevitably some similarities amongst the writers having similar education and belonging to the same class or nationality. I did not describe the type of movement of the various writing examined by me. I agree that there are three important movements in writing, namely, fore-arm movement, wrist movement, and finger movement. There is also a fourth which is the whole arm movement. I have not referred to the fact of movement in my report specifically and which particular type of movement it was. I have given no illustration with regard to these movements in my report. I agree that in execution there may be slow and drawn execution, slow and deliberate execution, rapid and very rapid execution. I may add that there may be natural execution also. I did not discuss any of these various methods of execution in my report. I have not myself prepared the photographic
Page: 605
documents. We have an expert photographer in our own Branch in the CID. Mr. A. Odud is our expert. He is available in our office. It was he who has prepared these enlargements; I have produced in this Court. I got these enlargements made under my supervision from this expert. These are photographs and not Photostats. To my mind, a Photostat copy means a photographic copy of the exact re -production of the original and in the other case an enlargement may not be exactly of the same size.I did not supervise the technical aspect of the photographic work but I was present and under my direction he enlarged the photographs from the original. I did ask him to enlarge to 15 ” size. In this case, I did not think a bigger enlargement would have any help.
I do not know what kind of film was used by the photographer in this case, nor any filter was used. It is not necessary to ascertain the identity of two writings in micro -chemical examination but that is done to determine the nature of ink used in the writings.
I cannot say how many times I found the words ………..’ and ………..’ occurring in the questioned documents that I examined. I examined the documents in my office. During the dates, I was examining the documents in this case. I did not examine any other document. All the documents which are mentioned in my first report were also examined along with the documents relating to Lt. Moazzem Hossain in the period I have given in my evidence. It is not correct to say that the disputed documents, in this case, were first forwarded to the CID at Dacca and when they did not give a positive opinion they were forwarded to Rawalpindi. It is not a fact that these documents were sent back to me from Rawalpindi. These documents were all sent to our S.P in CID initially. He gave them over to Mr. A. Majid Qureshi and also directed me to take Bengali writings from Mr. Qureshi. These documents were sent to Mr. Qureshi on 13.4.68 and some on 17.4.68. I do not know if Mr. Qureshi belongs to Army Intelligence Deptt. He works in the Central Intelligence Bureau in Rawalpindi. I cannot say on what date he came to Dacca. I met him first on 13.4.68. I gave my report along with the documents to Mr. Majid Qureshi and he must have forwarded it to the S.B. I think Mr. Majid Qureshi forwarded the report and the documents
Page: 606
that I gave on the day when I delivered to him i.e. on 21st of April, 1968. I do not know if there is a record in the CID office showing the date on which Mr. Qureshi had forwarded with report and the documents. Mr. Qureshi never supervised my examination of the documents. He did not come to my room, during examination of the documents by me. Except for the English letter Mr. Qureshi did not examine the other documents that I examined. I took all the necessary instruments for examination in my room. I did not see the forwarding letter that Mr. Qureshi might have sent. I cannot exactly say, but so far as I remember there was not power failure while I was examining the documents, in this case. Only the gate of the building in which our office is situated has been changed under the direction of our new D.I.G. but no doors of our room were changed when we were examining the documents. It is not a fact that this arrangement was made in order to keep me isolated under the supervision of Mr. Qureshi. It is not correct to say that after Mr. Mannaf had submitted his report about certain documents, special arrangements were made for supervision of the remaining work by Mr. Qureshi. I produced enlargements of writings in previous cases in court but not in the form of charts. It is not necessary that the chances of error would be greater if all the factors, namely, ink, age of writings, quality of paper, movements and standard writings are not considered while undertaking examination.
No other counsel wishes to cross-examine the witness.
Chairman. Member. Member
Page: 607
SPECIAL TRIBUNAL
9.1.1969.
Record of Proceedings Present
Mr. Justice S.A. Rahman, H.Pk., Charirman.
Mr. Justice M.R. Khan, S. pk., Member.
Mr. Justice Maksum-ul-Hakim, Member.
For the Prosecution …….. As before.
For the Defence …….. As before.
Accused present …….. As before.
Witness on oath …….. As before.
DEPOSITION OF P.W.238 MR. A. KADER CONTINUED TO COURT:
The ………..’in the words ………. in Q/2, Q/2a and Q/2b, the in the words ……….’ in Q/5, the ……….’ in the words ………..’in Q/10 and Q/10 and the ……….’ in the words ………..’, in S/20, is not a curve but has the tendency of a curve,
There is a flying bar over the letter ……….’ occurring in the words ………. and ……….’in S/25. There is also a flying bar over the letter ……….’in the word ……….’in S/25, but it is slightly different, for it goes to the left and then to the right slightly.
The letter ………..’ occurring in the words ………..’ and ………..’ in Q/2 has a flying bar, but the bar over the letter ………..’in the word ………..’ is a short one.
Page: 608
Over the letter ………..’ occurring in the words ……….’ and ………..’ – in Q/10, there is a flying bar. Also in words ………..? and ……….? occurring in S/20, there is a flying bar the letter ………..
The letter (Bargya-Ja) in the words ……….’ and ………’ in Q1 has been executed in one operation in simplified form. The letter – ……….’ (Bargya-ja) in the words ………..’ and ………..’ in Q2 has also been executed in one operation in simplified form. The letter ………..’ (Barayga-ja) in the words ……….’in S20 and ………..’in S21 and the letter ……….’ occurring in the words ………..’ and ……….’in S23 has been similarly executed in one operation in simplified form.
In Ql, in the word ……….? and ……….’ have been combined and executed in one operation in simplified form. The letter ………. and ………..’ in the word ………..’ occurring twice in the third paragraph of Q2 have also been combined and executed in one operation in simplified form. Similarly, the letter ……….. and ……….’in the word ………..’ occurring in S20 and S21 have been combined and executed in one operation in simplified form.
In Q1, there is no bar over the letter ……….’ occurring in the words ……….. (Thuheen) and ………..’ (Tusharh). Similarly, over the letter ………..’ occurring in the words ……….? (Thuheen) and ………..’ (Tusharh) in S/20 and S/21, there is no bar.
The ……….’in the words ………..’ and ……….’ in Q/2 takes a left hand turn and goes downwards with a short inward turn. Similar is the case with ……….’ in the words ……….’ and ……….’ occurring in Q/5. The ……….’ In the words and occurring in Q/10 and Q/10a has been executed in the same manner. Also in the words and occurring in S/20 has been executed in the same manner.
In Q/5, in the word ……….’ occurring thrice, the letter ……….? and the following vowel stroke ………..’ have been combined together and executed in one operation. In S/23 and S/23(a) in the word ……….’ occurring six times the letter ………. and the following vowel stroke ………..’ have been combined together and executed in one operation.
In Q/10(a), in the words ………..’ occurring five times, the letter ……….’ and ……….’ have been combined together and executed on one
Page: 609
operation, keeping a loop at the top. In S20 and $21, in the word ……….’, the letter ……….? and ……….’ have been similarly combined and executed in one operation keeping a loop at the top.
In Q1, in the word ……….’, the letter ……….’ and ………..’ have been combined and executed in one operation. In S25, the word ………..’ the letter ………..’ and ……….’ have also been combined and executed in one operation. Similarly, in S25 and 526, in the word ………..’ the letter …… and ……….’ have been combined and executed in one operation.
In Q2, in the word ………..’ the angular cut inside the letter. has been executed along with the letter itself in one operation · Similarly, in S20 the letter ……….’ and ……….’ has been executed in one operation in the words ………..’ and ……….’
Chairman.
Member
Member
Page: 610
—X—