Case of error
A leader of Pirojpur BNP has been named twice and a former district president of Islami Chhatra Shibir thrice as accused in a case filed with Pirojpur Police Station under the Anti-Terrorism Act on September 1.
Sheikh Riaz Uddin Rana, assistant organising secretary of the district unit of BNP, is mentioned as accused No 23 and 31 among 36 in the case.
According to the first information report (FIR), accused No 23 is Riaz Uddin Rana, son of Sheikh Abdul Jalil of Balaka Club Road. The accused No 31 is named as SK Rana, son of SK Jalil of Masimpur.
Rana is known as SK Rana in his locality, and Balaka Club Road is in Masimpur, said Sadullah Liton, councillor from ward-7 of Pirojpur municipality.
This correspondent obtained a copy of the FIR.
It mentions Abdur Razzak Sheikh, former district unit president of Shibir, the student wing of Jamaat-e-Islami, as accused No 25, 28 and 36. All three bear same name and address.
Both Rana and Razzak claimed police implicated them in a false case just to harass them.
Complainant of the case, Sub-Inspector Nurul Amin Howlader of Pirojpur Police Station, said in the case statement that he and his team members raided the house of Syedul Islam Kismat in Horer Hawla area around 2:30am on September 1 after a tip-off that 36 identified and 15-20 unknown others gathered there.
In the name of observing a declared programme, they were holding a secret meeting to plan subversive activities like blasting petrol bombs, creating panic and damaging lives and property, he added.
Police in the raid arrested five, including Kismat, and seized eight petrol bombs and some iron rods, reads the case statement.
His wife Akikunnesa claimed seven to eight cops took away her husband at 11:40pm on August 31. “Everything mentioned in the case is false,” she added.
Kismat is the organising secretary of district BNP.
This correspondent visited the area yesterday and talked to five locals, who said as far as they know, no such gathering took place that night.
Contacted SM Ziaul Haque, Officer-in-Charge of the police station, said mentioning same person as different accused may have occurred due to “typing mistakes”.
“In every case, the accused claim to be innocent,” he said, adding the incident mentioned in the case is true.