Woman Abuse Case Dismissed: Allegations of exerting influence against two judges

Allegations of abuse of power at every step have been raised against former Chief Metropolitan Magistrate of Dhaka, Md. Sanaullah, to escape a woman abuse case. The complainant, Nasrin Akhter, claims that Dhaka's Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Mohammad Mostafizur Rahman assisted in this effort. She alleges that he pressured her over the phone on two occasions to withdraw the case and reach a settlement. When she refused, she was harassed through another case. Even then, the complainant, Nasrin Akhter (Sanaullah's former wife), did not give in.

On Thursday, the day of charge framing in the case, she filed an application in court expressing fear of being denied justice. It stated: "Since the accused is a high-ranking government official, the complainant is interested in having the case tried in a higher court. The process of transferring the case to a higher court is also underway. In this situation, if the charge-framing hearing proceeds, the complainant will be denied justice."

However, Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Jewel Rana did not take the complainant's application into consideration and acquitted the accused Sanaullah, dismissing the case. In his order, he said: "As the chargesheet does not contain sufficient material to proceed with trial, the accused is being acquitted from the case." Analysis of case documents, the complainant's allegations, and Agamir Somoy's investigation have uncovered such sensational information.

It has been learned that the accused in the case, Md. Sanaullah, is a judge by profession. He is currently posted at the Bangladesh Election Commission, serving as Deputy Secretary (Law) in the Law Division of that institution on deputation. Previously, he served as Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at the Dhaka Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's Court. When this judge, who had delivered verdicts in the trials of many victims, himself became an accused in a woman abuse case filed by his former wife, he began resorting to abuse of power and various tactics to escape.

The investigation revealed that on 13 January, Nasrin Akhter filed a case against Sanaullah at the Banani Police Station alleging dowry demands and torture. During the process of filing the case, Sanaullah's colleague, Dhaka Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Mohammad Mostafizur Rahman, became involved in the matter. He called the complainant's mobile phone twice and spoke for a total of 21 minutes.

The complainant alleged: "During the conversation, he proposed that I not file the case and instead reach a settlement. He also tempted me with money in exchange. He said, 'You cannot fight with a judge.' After I ignored his request, he began exerting influence from the very moment the case was filed."

When contacted, Dhaka Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Mohammad Mostafizur Rahman initially denied speaking with the complainant and instead asked this reporter, "Who told you all this?" When informed that specific evidence and proof regarding the matter were available, he told Agamir Somoy: "The lady called me, so I spoke with her."

"If there is a dispute, it is possible to suggest mutual settlement to someone," he said in response to a question. He further said, "I spoke not during the judicial process of the case, but at the investigation stage. The investigation had just begun at that time. I am the head of the office, and Sanaullah served under me. It is natural for me to get involved in the personal issues of those who were or are under my supervision."

Investigation findings reveal that Sanaullah not only resorted to influence by intimidating but also engaged in fraud and forgery to escape the case. He also trapped the complainant in a fabricated case. After the case was filed on 13 January, the complainant was deceived again under the pretext of a settlement. She became close to him again on the assurance that everything would be resolved. He promised to resume conjugal life on the condition that she withdraw the case. However, secretly, he sent a divorce notice to the complainant on 7 January this year through the Agargaon Sub-Post Office. Sanaullah himself received the envelope containing the notice after forging the complainant's signature without her knowledge.

Documents obtained from Dhaka North City Corporation show that the last divorce hearing attendance was on 20 April. On that day, as no one appeared, the arbitration proceedings were concluded and the divorce became effective. However, the divorce certificate that Sanaullah submitted to the court to gain advantage in the case was fabricated through cunning means. The certificate, issued on 3 June by Sahbuddin, the Marriage and Divorce Registrar of a Kazi Office in Madhubagh, shows the date of divorce as 6 December of the previous year. Earlier, Sanaullah had also resorted to fraud at the time of marriage registration. In the Nikahnama, he concealed the fact that he had a previous wife and children. In the column of the Nikahnama asking whether the groom has any existing wife, Sanaullah wrote "No" and signed it.

Nasrin Akhter alleged: "Sanaullah, through a close associate named Ruhul Amin, filed a fabricated case against me in court (C.R. Case No. 736/26). The petition states that I trapped Sanaullah and forced him to marry me, and that I have been defaming him by filing a false dowry and assault case. Following court orders, the case is now being investigated by Uttara West Thana Police."

When contacted, Ruhul Amin, the complainant in that case, said: "I no longer have any contact with Sanaullah. I do not wish to speak about this matter."

It has been learned that a renowned actor from the country's film industry was a witness to Sanaullah's marriage. Speaking to Agamir Somoy on condition of anonymity, he said: "The marriage took place with mutual consent of both parties. After the wedding, they even went on a honeymoon for three days at the Grand Sultan in Sylhet. Even at the time of the wedding, I could sense that the man (Sanaullah) was not good. When he objected to taking wedding photographs, I felt that something was wrong with him."

It has been learned that on 30 April, Sub-Inspector Shahanaz Begum of the Women Support and Investigation Division of Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP) submitted a chargesheet against Sanaullah before the court, naming six individuals as witnesses. The chargesheet stated that the accused is a high-ranking government official. It also mentioned that the accused has a first wife and three children from that marriage. The accused had developed a connection and close relationship with the complainant through a legal consultation matter.
"Eventually, by mutual decision, they got married through a registered Kabin (marriage contract) on 22 September last year. After the marriage, the accused used various pretexts to take money from the complainant. In continuation of this, within a few days, the accused demanded that she buy him a branded car and land. When the complainant expressed her inability, at one point during an argument, the accused Sanaullah became enraged and brutally beat her. The complainant sustained injuries. After analyzing the evidence gathered during the investigation, reviewing the medical certificate, and considering the circumstances of the incident, the offence under Section 11(G) of the Women and Children Repression Prevention Act, 2000 against the accused Md. Sanaullah was preliminarily proven to be true."

Sources said that the police investigation found the allegations to be true. After the hearing on the admissibility of the chargesheet, which was prepared based on the evidence obtained and the statements of the accused, the court took cognisance of the matter. However, on the day of charge framing, the judge stated that the chargesheet did not contain sufficient material to proceed with trial. This is unusual.

When contacted, the police officer who prepared the chargesheet, Shahanaz Begum, said: "All types of information and data needed to prove the allegations have been submitted along with the chargesheet. Now, the dismissal of the case is within the court's jurisdiction. I do not wish to comment on this matter."

On this issue, Supreme Court lawyer Shafiqul Islam Khan Sabuj said: "If there is insufficient material, the accused may be acquitted at the charge-framing hearing. In that case, if the complainant wishes, she can appeal against this order."

When contacted by phone on Thursday evening to seek his comments on the allegations of influence peddling, Sanaullah did not answer. However, in a previous phone conversation after the chargesheet was submitted, he had told this reporter: "The complainant managed the police to get the chargesheet filed. That will be taken care of. Because the chargesheet has mechanically stated that everything has been proven. In reality, nothing has been proven."