Requirement for higher authority’s approval before arrest in Anti-discrimination Movement cases challenged in court

It names the home secretary, IGP, DMP commissioner, and the chiefs of DB, CID, and SB as respondents

A petition has been filed in the High Court challenging the legality of requiring higher authorities’ permission before the arrest of suspects in cases related to the Anti-discrimination Student Movement.

It also seeks a stay on the effectiveness of the office order issued by Police Headquarters on Apr 10, alongside a rule nisi.

Supreme Court lawyer Md Jashim Uddin lodged the application with the High Court bench of Justice Fatema Najib and Justice Sikder Mahmudur Razi on Sunday.

The petition names the home secretary, the inspector general of police (IGP), the commissioner of Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP), and the heads of the Detective Branch (DB), Criminal Investigation Department (CID), and Special Branch (SB) as respondents.

Jashim expressed hope that a hearing on the matter could take place within this week.

He said the Supreme Court had declared unconstitutional any provision requiring prior approval for the arrest of government employees.

“In light of that ruling, the office order issued by Police Headquarters is unlawful.”

“If a person turns out to be innocent in a criminal case, there are provisions under the Code of Criminal Procedure to relieve them from charges,” Jashim added.

The lawyer, however, argued that the contested order bypasses existing law, which is impermissible.

On Apr 10, DMP issued an office order mandating that arrests in Movement-related cases must be made only with proper evidence and prior approval from senior authorities.

The order, signed by DMP Joint Commissioner Faruq Hossain, reads: “In most cases related to the Anti-discrimination Movement, the number of accused named in the case is high. Arrests of both FIR-named and investigation-identified suspects must be carried out with credible evidence – including victim or witness statements, photos, videos, audio clips, and call detail records (CDRs) – and with permission from higher authorities.”