The High Court on Tuesday asked the government to explain if the Rapid Action Battalion had been empowered by the law to pick citizens without having a case against them.
The bench of Justice Farah Mahbub and Justice Ahmed Sohel also said that the Digital Security Act gave no authority to the battalion to arrest any person or investigate any case filed under the law.
The bench raised the question to attorney general AM Amin Uddin during the hearing of a writ petition filed by lawyer Manoj Kumar Bhowmick on Tuesday, seeking an impartial inquiry into the death of government official Sultana Jasmine in the custody of the battalion on March 24.
Jasmine, 41, an office assistant at Chandipur union parishad land office in Nagaon Sadar, died in Rajshahi Medical College Hospital on March 24 under the custody of the RAB.
An inquest report prepared by assistant commissioner Jasmine Akter of Rajshahi’s deputy commissioner’s office found blood clots and marks of torture on the victim’s right hand.
The RAB picked Jasmine up in a white microbus on her way to the office on the morning of March 22 and she was shifted to Nagaon Sadar Hospital before being referred to RMCH.
The court adjourned the hearing of the petition until April 5 and asked attorney general Amin to submit the post-mortem report of the deceased at the next hearing.
The attorney general, complying with the court’s verbal order issued on Monday, placed a RAB report on Jasmine to the judges without reading out it before the crowded courtroom.
The court read the report at a glance and found that no case was pending against Jasmine when she was picked up by the RAB.
Referring to the report, the court further observed that Jasmine was interrogated on a microbus after she was picked up on her way to the union land office at about 11:15am on March 22.
The court, referring to the RAB report, observed that Jasmine was not taken to a police station or the office of the battalion after she was picked up.
‘It is our question to you that if picking Jasmine up by the RAB without a case, the process of her interrogation and extraction of her confessional statement and collecting evidence from her mobile phone was lawful, without sending her to a magistrate,’ the court asked the attorney general.
Referring to the public perception of torture on Jasmine in custody before her death, the court asked RAB to clear the matter.
‘Otherwise, the entire institution as RAB would be tainted,’ the court said.
The court said that all citizens would be dealt with in accordance with the law whatever heinous crimes they might commit.
The attorney general said that the state would not take any responsibility for the crime of an individual member of the force.
The court said that allegations brought against the RAB for killing Jasmine in the custody should be investigated so that none could be victimised.
The attorney general opposed an order to launch an inquiry against RAB, stating that the incident deserved no inquiry.
The court said that an inquiry was needed as the lady died in the custody of RAB.
Petitioner Manoj Kumar Bhowmick sought an impartial inquiry headed by a retired Supreme Court judge as the allegation against RAB picking up citizens and making them traceless was common.
The court, however, asked Manoj to focus on the death of Jasmine in RAB custody.
Amin Uddin defended the RAB, arguing that Jasmine used to take bribes from locals promising jobs.
He said that an on-duty team of the battalion picked Jasmine up on a microbus after tracking her mobile phone immediately after it received a complaint of cybercrimes from a high government official in the area.
The court said that the law did not permit the RAB to pick an accused of cybercrime or any person named in a case under the Digital Security Act.
The court said that the law allowed only police to deal with DSA cases.
The court further said that RAB had no authority to pick Jesmine based on a general diary, adding that an inquiry was a must for making the arrest on the basis of a general diary.
Amin Uddin said that Jasmine might feel sick as RAB produced her conservations with cheated persons after the seizure of her mobile phone.
He argued that Jasmine could feel sick out of shame after the disclosure of her cheating in public and the university-going son.
Amin Uddin, referring to Jasmine’s prescription at Nagaon General Hospital, said that she had been suffering from brain bleeds before she was admitted to the hospital at 9:20pm on March 22.
Amin Uddin, however, did not submit the names and ranks of the RAB personnel involved in the arrest and interrogation of Jasmine as sought by the court on Monday.
Rapid Action Battalion headquarters has, meanwhile, started an internal inquiry into Jasmine’s death in its custody.
The inquiry was initiated to find out whether the RAB personnel concerned had any unethical involvement and negligence that led to the incident, said RAB’s media wing director Khankader Al-Moin during a briefing on Tuesday.
He said that the RAB headquarters formed an inquiry committee on Monday to find out the actual incident.
Moin said that Jasmine was detained at about 11:30am after receiving a complaint from Enamul Haque, the local government director of the Rajshahi divisional commissioner’s office.
Enamul was present during the detention as he complained to RAB’s petrol team that his fake Facebook account was being operated in his name and RAB members detained Jasmine based on that.
She fell sick in RAB’s car and was immediately rushed to a hospital in Naogaon, said the RAB official.
Asked about the forensic doctor’s observation of spotting the torture mark on her head, Moin said that they don’t have any idea about the torture mark.
Contacted, Jasmine’s uncle Nazmul Haque said that she did not live in a well-off condition and always faced financial crises.
‘Jasmine’s son is a university student and she had to struggle to secure his educational expenses. Jasmine often sought financial support from me,’ said her uncle.
Nazmul asked why she would live in dire conditions and seek financial support if she had scammed a huge amount of money.
The National Human Rights Commissioner in a statement on Monday said that such custodial death was a crime and an utter violation of human rights.
In the statement, NHRC sought a probe report from the home ministry over the Naogaon custodial death.
NHRC asked the senior secretary of the public security division of the ministry to investigate the custodial death incident by any other police unit, except RAB.
Left Democratic Alliance and Hill Women’s Federation in separate statements expressed concerns about the death in custody.
