Home
+
Published : 28 Jun 2026, 12:07 PM
The International Crimes Tribunal is set to deliver its verdict in the case of crimes against humanity in the shooting and killing of two people, including a youth hanging from the cornice of a building in Dhaka’s Rampura during the 2024 July Uprising.
After hearing the arguments of the state and the accused on Jun 15, the three-member judicial panel led by the chairman of the International Crimes Tribunal-1, Justice Md Golam Mortuza Mozumder, set Sunday for the verdict. The other two members of the tribunal are Justice Md Shafiul Alam Mahmud and District and Sessions Judge Md Mohitul Haque Enam Chowdhury.
On Jul 31 last year, the tribunal’s investigation agency submitted its report in the case to the Chief Prosecutor's Office. Following this, on Aug 7, Prosecutor Farooq Ahmed submitted a formal complaint on behalf of the prosecution to the tribunal.
On Sept 18, the trial officially began with the framing of charges against a total of five police officers, including former Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP) Commissioner Habibur Rahman.
The list of accused in the case includes then DMP commissioner Habibur Rahman, former additional deputy commissioner of Khilgaon Zone Md Rashedul Islam, former chief of Rampura Police Station Md Mashiur Rahman, former sub-inspector of Rampura Police Station Tariqul Islam Bhuiyan, and former Rampura Police Outpost assistant sub-inspector Chanchal Chandra Sarkar.
Among the accused, only ASI Chanchal has been arrested and is in jail. The four remaining officers are absconding.
Chanchal was arrested in Khagrachhari’s Dighinala on Jan 28.
According to the case documents, three charges were originally framed against the accused.
The first charge states that, in order to suppress the quota reform movement, the accused, under the direct instructions of the then prime minister and senior officials, and on the orders of DMP commissioner Habibur Rahman, went outside their assigned area and attacked innocent students and members of the public with deadly weapons. On Jul 19, at approximately 2 to 2:30pm, in the lane in front of Banasree Jame Mosque, adjacent to Rampura Police Station in Banasree H Block, police opened fire indiscriminately. Two bullets pierced a man named Md Nadeem, 38, through the stomach and exited through his back. As a result of the wounds, he died on the spot.
The second charge revolves around shooting and seriously injuring 18-year-old Amir Hossain with the intention of killing him. On Jul 19, at around 3pm, while returning home from work, Amir was shot as he was chased by the police and took shelter in an under-construction building of the Dhaka South City Corporation next to Banasree Jame Mosque. In an attempt to protect himself, he hung from the centring pipe of the roof of the third floor of the building.
According to the complaint, ASI Chanchal Chandra Sarkar and SI Tariqul Islam Bhuiyan arrived there and told him to jump down. When he did not, they fired six shots at him in quick succession. He was seriously injured in the incident.
The third complaint in the case details the shooting death of an elderly woman named Maya Islam, 60, and the attempt to murder of her 6-year-old grandson, Basit Khan Musa. On the same day, around 3:30pm, the child and his grandmother were inside the gate on the ground floor of a house in front of Rampura Police Station in Banasree G Block. As the accused continued to fire to kill protesters, a bullet fired by the police went through the head of the child Musa and directly hit his grandmother Maya in the stomach. Maya died while undergoing treatment at a hospital.
On Oct 23, 2025, former chief prosecutor Mohammad Tajul Islam presented the opening statement for the prosecution in Tribunal-1.
On the same day, the first witness in the case, the injured Amir, described the horrific shooting he had suffered.
In his statement, he said that after Friday prayers, he was returning to his aunt's house in Rampura from his workplace at Mama Coffee Shop in Aftab Nagar when he came under fire from the police and BGB. To save his life, he climbed onto the roof of the under-construction building, and when three policemen chased him, he hung down from the roof rod. When he refused to jump down, a policeman fired three rounds at him in quick succession, and another policeman came and fired three more rounds, all of which pierced his leg. He narrated his treatment at Famous Hospital, Dhaka Medical, Farazi Hospital, Tongi Ahsania Hospital, National Heart Hospital and Savar CRP to the tribunal and demanded exemplary punishment for the culprits.
On the second day of the testimony, on Oct 27, the father of the injured child, Md Mostafizur Rahman, testified before the tribunal. Describing the shooting of his child and the death of his mother before his eyes, he said: “Although my son is alive, he has lost the power to speak, which has shattered all the dreams of our family.”
Then, on Nov 4, 2025, SI Md Golam Kibria Khan, who was assigned to Rampura Police Station during the mass uprising, testified.
He told the court that in the viral video, SI Tariqul and ASI Chanchal were identified as shooting a youth hanging from a rod of an under-construction building at a protest near Rampura Police Station.
During his testimony, he also said that on Jul 18, then DMP commissioner Habibur Rahman ordered the firing of Chinese rifles while in the kneeling position to suppress the movement and on July 21 or 22, the suspect Mashiur came to Rampura Police Station and was given a cash reward of Tk 100,000.
However, the tribunal prosecution raised questions about the SI Kibria, asking why he was not included in the list of suspects despite the fact that this police officer was allotted government weapons and ammunition under his name on the day of the incident.
The general diary (GD) of the then OC of Rampura Police Station also mentions the allocation of ammunition and weapons in the name of Kibria.
Chief Prosecutor Aminul Islam said in this regard, "The witness processing in this case was completed long before I took charge. I myself saw that one of the witnesses was named Golam Kibria, a police officer. Weapons and ammunition were issued in his name on the day of the incident. Our investigating officer made him a witness.
He said, "If he (Golam Kibria) has not committed a crime, then he will not be accused for any reason. However, if he has committed a crime or participated in it and has been made a witness, then we will inform the tribunal that we will look into the matter. He cannot be released from liability just on the pretext of giving testimony. If Golam Kibria has any involvement in the crime, he will definitely be brought to justice. We have the opportunity."
According to the case documents, although the investigating officer and assistant director of the ICT Investigation Agency, Syed Abdur Rouf, took the statements of a total of 30 witnesses during the investigation, the prosecution presented the statements of 14 important witnesses during the trial.
In addition to witness testimony, the investigating officer presented CCTV footage, call records and wireless message audio as documentary evidence during his statement on Dec 2 and Dec 10 last year and rejected the defendant's claim of AI-generated video on the basis of documentary evidence.
Then, on Jan 13, 2026, the accused ASI Chanchal gave his first defence testimony.
There, he claimed his innocence, saying that no firearm was issued in his name on Jul 19 and that he was not at the scene at the time of the incident. He blamed SI Tariqul for the shooting based on the diary of the then OC.
After testimony from both sides, the first stage of arguments in the case began on Jan 25, 2026, and ended on February 3. After the arguments, the tribunal initially set Feb 15 as the date for the verdict, but later deferred it to Mar 4.
However, on Mar 4, the prosecution moved the tribunal for an additional four weeks to submit new digital evidence. That day, defence lawyer Sarwar Jahan Nippon sought six weeks' time and sought bail for the arrested accused Chanchal, which the tribunal rejected, considering the trial stage. Later, the tribunal gave the prosecution five weeks' time and fixed Apr 9 as the date for hearing the new evidence.
Chief Prosecutor Aminul said that while reviewing the case, he found a video recording of an extra-judicial confession by the accused Chanchal, where he directly admitted how and on whose orders he had opened fire.
On Apr 9, the chief prosecutor presented a report to the tribunal stating that Chanchal's confessional video, which was circulating on social media, was not made with AI, but was completely authentic and true. In view of this, the defendant's lawyer, Sarwar Jahan, requested the tribunal to take new testimony from Chanchal, which the tribunal granted.
On Jun 10, 2026, the accused Chanchal Chandra Sarkar gave his second round of exculpatory testimony or cross-examination in the tribunal.
In this statement, he claimed that a prosecutor of the International Crimes Tribunal, Tanvir Hasan Joha, forced him to confess.
Chanchal alleged that while he was in police custody after his arrest, Joha intimidated him and threatened to kill him and his close relatives through Army contacts. He claimed that he gave the statement in the video while in a state of mental distress.
However, Prosecutor Joha completely denied the allegations to reporters.
He admitted that he was the person conducting the interrogation in the video, but said that after failing to catch the fugitive Tariqul, he himself went to Dighinala, arrested Chanchal, and only interrogated him before presenting him to the court without making any threats.
After the addition of new evidence and a second round of defence testimony, the case was reopened for legal arguments. On Jun 15, the state and the defence presented their arguments based on this new evidence.
On the same day, after reviewing all the testimony, evidence, and legal analysis, the tribunal set Jun 28 as the date for the verdict.
