Corruption Case: 41 Years On, Still No Verdict

**41-Year-Old Embezzlement Case Still Awaits Verdict**

More than four decades ago, a case involving embezzlement at a private bank’s Dhaka branch was filed, yet the trial remains unfinished, and the three accused—two bankers among them—are still absconding.

Of the 14 listed witnesses, only three have appeared in court, while some have passed away over the years. Recently, a date has finally been set for the court's judgment.

A Prothom Alo investigation revealed that Tk 2,23,700 was embezzled from Agrani Bank’s Moulvibazar branch in Old Dhaka on October 21, 1983, through forged cheques. The bank lodged a complaint on November 7, naming three individuals, including bank officials Kazi Nurul Islam and Swapan Kumar Bhowmik. However, it took 30 years just to bring the plaintiff to court, and over the last decade, the prosecution repeatedly sought extensions to produce witnesses. Statements were only gathered last year from a witness and earlier this year from the investigation officer. The state has been unable to produce further witnesses since.

On September 23, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) requested more time to gather witnesses, which the court denied, setting the date for closing arguments. The ACC again sought an extension on October 20, which was also denied; the court scheduled judgment for November 14.

ACC prosecutor Mohammad Rafiqul Islam attributed delays to the age of the case and the passing of many witnesses. However, prominent lawyer Ehsanul Haque Samazi challenged this, alleging serious negligence in managing the case. “Why should a corruption case languish for 41 years in trial court? The delay is due to state negligence,” he told Prothom Alo.

Documents indicate that Abdul Majid, owner of Bilas Trading, withdrew Tk 2,23,700 with a fake cheque from Agrani Bank’s Moulvibazar branch, allegedly with the help of the two accused bank officials. The case was filed by former bank general manager Mir Ashraf Ali with Lalbagh police under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The charge sheet was submitted in 1985, and the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) followed up with a supplementary charge sheet in 1994. Charges were officially framed in 1995.

The accused challenged the trial court’s order in the High Court, which delayed proceedings until 2005. It was only in 2013 that the plaintiff was finally brought to court. After another decade, two additional witnesses testified, but eight more remain unaccounted for. The court has sent multiple requests to the ACC to produce these witnesses, including a recent letter to the ACC’s director general.

ACC Director General (Prevention) Akhtar Hossain said he was unaware of any 41-year-old pending case but would investigate. Commenting on the delay, former judge Saifuzzaman Hero stated that such prolonged trials harm society and urged accountability for those who disregarded court orders, suggesting that the court take appropriate action if deemed necessary.