Dhaka, July 16 – The High Court on Tuesday asked the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) to inform it on what action it has been taken against the responsible officers of the commission over the ordeal of Jaha Alam, who was wrongly languishing in jail for three years due to identity mix-up.
After primary hearing on report submitted by the ACC, the HC bench comprising Justice FRM Nazmul Ahasan and Justice KM Kamrul Kader also fixed August 21 for further hearing on the issue.
During yesterday’s proceedings, advocate Khurshid Alam Khan, counsel for the ACC, admitted that there was lack of coordination in the handling of the cases.
The HC bench commented that it the media have not published report regarding the Jaha Alam incident, it might have been created another Judge Miah drama.
At one stage of hearing, the HC bench raised questions saying that how a person open 33 accounts in different banks. Is it possible without the help of banks officials and without the cooperation of each other, the HC bench asked.
In its report, the ACC acknowledged that it was wrong on the part of its investigation officers to have identified Jaha Alam as Abu Salek, the real accused in 26 cases of misappropriation of funds from Sonali Bank amounting to Tk. 18.5 crore.
In its internal investigation report on Jaha Alam’s identity mix-up, the ACC probe body also alleged that the officers of BRAC Bank and other banks had also played a role in identifying the wrong person and derailing the ACC investigators probing cases against Abu Salek.
The 23-page probe report was submitted to the HC bench on July 11 through ACC lawyer advocate Khurshid Alam Khan.
It seems that the mistake of identifying Jaha Alam as Abu Salek happened because of the investigation officials,” said the report prepared by ACC Director (legal wing) Abul Hasnat Md Abdul Wadud.
Describing the extent of the officials’ carelessness, the report said 12 ACC officials investigated the cases, but none of them visited Jaha Alam’s house.
Some bank officials and introducers of Salek’s bank accounts misled the investigation officials, it mentioned.
“But it is the duty of the investigation officials to unearth the truth and present it before the court. There is no scope for shifting this duty to bank officials or someone else,” said the probe report.
The report also suggested punishment for those responsible for the “unfortunate” incident.
Earlier, on June 27, the HC bench asked the ACC to submit its internal probe report by July 11 on Jaha Alam, saying: “We will look into who is responsible. The report is very important.”
On April 17, the HC sought the ACC probe report on Jaha Alam, a jute mill worker, who spent three years in jail while the real accused remained at large, to fix responsibility for the lapse.
Earlier, on March 5, the ACC had informed the HC in a report that the commission was not responsible for the plight of Jaha Alam.
“Cases were filed against Jaha Alam on the basis of documents from Bangladesh Bank and Sonali Bank,” the commission said in its report.
Jaha Alam, who spent the last three years in jail instead of the real accused, was released from prison on February 4. He had been arrested on February 6, 2016 after being mistaken for Abu Salek, who is the actual accused in 26 cases that the ACC had filed in 2014 over loan fraud and embezzlement amounting to Tk. 18.5 crore from Sonali Bank.
When the ACC sent for Salek, the summons went to Jaha Alam, who, in turn, met officials of the corruption watchdog and insisted that he was not Salek.
He also told the ACC that the photo that had been used to open the Sonali Bank account was not his either. But the bank’s officials still identified him as Salek and the jute mill worker was eventually arrested in Ghorashal following the ACC’s green light.
On May 27 the same year, Jaha Alam was transferred to the Dhaka Central Jail 2.
Despite appearing before the court many times since then, Jaha Alam did not get bail.
Identifying Jaha Alam as Salek in 26 of the 33 cases, the ACC submitted charge-sheets and the cases began being heard in court.
Last year, several media reports brought the matter of Jaha Alam’s innocence to the ACC’s attention, forcing further investigations into the matter.
Eventually, the ACC found Jaha Alam’s claims of innocence to be true.
On January 28, in a suo motu rule, the High Court summoned a representative of the ACC chairman, the cases’ plaintiff, the ACC investigatiing officer, and two other representatives from the home and law ministries to explain why Jaha Alam—instead of the real accused—had been in jail for the past three years.
Supreme Court lawyer Amit Das Gupta presented Jaha Alam’s case before the HC bench. Finally, Jaha Alam was released on bail following the HC order. – Staff Reporter
