Khaleda slams govt for evicting Moudud from Gulshan home

BNP chief Khaleda Zia has visited senior party leader Moudud Ahmed after his eviction from his Gulshan home of more than four decades.

Senior Correspondentbdnews24.com
Published : 7 June 2017, 02:42 PM
Updated : 7 June 2017, 07:03 PM

RAJUK, the capital development authority, began the drive to vacate the house in Gulshan-2 on Wednesday noon, marking an end to a long legal battle.

Khaleda, who arrived in the neighbourhood later in the day, had been evicted from her home inside Dhaka Cantonment seven years ago after losing a legal battle.

The party chief was seen speaking to Moudud, who was visibly shaken by the eviction drive, surrounded by movers and policemen. Moudud told Khaleda how the raid was launched without prior notice. 

BNP Secretary General Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, Vice Chairman Khandoker Mahbub Hossain, Senior Joint Secretary General Ruhul Kabir Rizvi and Joint Secretary General Mahbub Uddin Khokon were also seen around the house.

Khaleda, before visiting Moudud, made scathing remarks on the government at an Iftar party at the International Convention City Bashundhara.  

"He (Moudud) is a BNP man, and they're accusing him of illegally occupying the house. Barrister Moudud has been living in that house for 30 years. He has been thrown out into the street today." 

Khaleda said the government had also thrown her out of her home of 40 years. 

"The people are watching everything. The government too will be thrown out. They think they'll be fine. But the people won't let that happen. Allah surely does justice," she said.       

Moudud speaking to reporters earlier said he will sleep on the pavement as he was helpless against the "illegal forces" of the government.   

"The case with the Supreme Court has been cleared. But why can't there be a notice? Did the court give out an order today? Do they (RAJUK) have an order? 

"They just walk into someone's house. Do we not have the law?" said the senior lawyer. 

"How can you say this is state property? This isn't the state's property. The Supreme Court said so."