The prosecutor Saydur Rahman gave the defence copies of lots of new documents in relation to the Sayedee case which were not given earlier.
Haider Ali said that they have given the defence copies of all the documents that the investigation officer will exhibit and that as far as he understands the Tribunal has already given permission for this
When the cross examination started and the prosecution began mentioning the newly served documents, the defence lawyer, Mizanul Islam said that they were not given notice of these documents. He said that yesterday the tribunal passed an order regarding the documents newly served that day, and that the tribunal must now either pass similar orders for these prosecution exhibits or note our objection to these exhibits.
He went onto say that the previous days order concerned the documents regarding which the prosecution had mentioned in the seizure list and the custody letter earlier but that in relation to these new documents, they had not serve any seizure list or custody letters. So we had no notice of these documents.
Tajul Islam, for the defence then rose and said that the defence had asked for these documents earlier by filing an application and that at the time you rejected the application saying that any documents which had not been given will not be considered. He then said that now the prosecution is submitting new documents without having provided the defence a copy and you are accepting those documents as exhibits. This is clear violation of sections 9(4) and 16(2) of the 1973 Act.
The chairman said, that the tribunal had heard the defence. He then asked the prosecutor whether there were any additional documents that remain unserved and that if there were they should be served now.
Mizanul Islam said that this is not time for service of these documents, and that if they want to do it they must serve the new documents in accordance with section 9(4).
Helal Uddin, the Investigation Officer continues giving his evidence in chief. (continuing from yesterday)
The chairman did not say anything and allowed prosecution to exhibit the documents.
Haider Ali: I have completed exhibiting the documents. Now do I need to exhibit the books that we are submitting before the trial? Do we need to give copies of these books to the defence. If we give names to the defence they can buy it from market.
Chairman: yes, if these documents are available in market then the defence may collect them. But you should give name. But if any book is rare then you should give copy.
Justice Zaheer: Just refer only to the important pages of the books.
Mizanul Islam: If they submit book before the Tribunal that means this book have probative value and they are relying upon that book. When we were given list of prosecution documents before the trial we thought that it is complete list. We never thought to recheck this with the list submitted to the tribunal. But now from the prosecution submission it is clear that the list before the tribunal and the list given to us are not same. How can the prosecution give us a different list? Moreover merely giving list is not sufficient. If the prosecution wants to submit any book in support of their case the it is clear that they want to rely on them against the accused. So the defence has legal right to get copies of these books before trial.
Justice Zaheer: Did not you get the list of those books?
Haider Ali: My lord, I have given.
Mizanul Islam: These are given just before examination of the Investigation Officer. It was not on the previous list. My lord, please give the copy to us, we will make copy of these books.
Justice Nizam: If it is possible to you to make copy of the books then why not defence?
Justice Zaheer: Mr. Haider Ali, Did you give the list of those copies upon which you rely?
Mizanul Islam: My lord, serial no. 36,37,38,54,58, 42 are not provided to us.
Justice Zaheer: Mr. Haider Ali, did not you give with the formal charge? If you are relying upon these documents then why you did not give copy to the defence.
Prosecution: we are not required to give copies of the books. We could have filed these books under section 19(1) of the Act at the time of arguments. Why we should give copy to the defence.
Justice Zaheer: but you are relying upon these documents.
Prosecution: I will give reply tomorrow.
Then the Court was adjourned.
Haider Ali said that they have given the defence copies of all the documents that the investigation officer will exhibit and that as far as he understands the Tribunal has already given permission for this
When the cross examination started and the prosecution began mentioning the newly served documents, the defence lawyer, Mizanul Islam said that they were not given notice of these documents. He said that yesterday the tribunal passed an order regarding the documents newly served that day, and that the tribunal must now either pass similar orders for these prosecution exhibits or note our objection to these exhibits.
He went onto say that the previous days order concerned the documents regarding which the prosecution had mentioned in the seizure list and the custody letter earlier but that in relation to these new documents, they had not serve any seizure list or custody letters. So we had no notice of these documents.
Tajul Islam, for the defence then rose and said that the defence had asked for these documents earlier by filing an application and that at the time you rejected the application saying that any documents which had not been given will not be considered. He then said that now the prosecution is submitting new documents without having provided the defence a copy and you are accepting those documents as exhibits. This is clear violation of sections 9(4) and 16(2) of the 1973 Act.
The chairman said, that the tribunal had heard the defence. He then asked the prosecutor whether there were any additional documents that remain unserved and that if there were they should be served now.
Mizanul Islam said that this is not time for service of these documents, and that if they want to do it they must serve the new documents in accordance with section 9(4).
Helal Uddin, the Investigation Officer continues giving his evidence in chief. (continuing from yesterday)
Page- 2807: On 20th March, 2011, at 10:30 A.M.- I’ve seized the “Shei Razakar” report series of Daily Janakantha [of 2nd January- 31st January, 2001] - in total 29 Newspapers from PIB (Press Institute of Bangladesh). This is the seizure list; I’ve signed it [Display No- 61/1]. I’ve send the Newspapers to the custody of Mr. Rabiul Anam Khan. This is the custody sheet which hold display number 62/1. I’ve collected the photocopies of those newspapers and thus submitted it to the tribunal. These are the photocopies of the newspapers which holds the display no: 61- 93. The main copy is submitted to the court.The defence lawyer, Mizanul Islam, then intervened and said that the defence had earlier filed an application for service of legible copies of these documents and that at the time you had rejected the defence application and said that the documents that are not liegible will not be considered. Now you are exhibiting these illegible documents. We will be prejudiced.
On 21st March, 2011, at 9:30 A.M. I seized the “Shei Razakar” report series of Daily Janakantha [of 1st February- 28th February, 2001]. in total 28 Newspapers from PIB. This is the seizure list holds display number- 93. This is the seizure list; I’ve signed it [Display No- 93/1]. I’ve sent the Newspapers to the custody of Mr. Rabiul Anam Khan. This is the custody sheet which holds display number 93. I’ve collected the photocopies of those newspapers and thus submitted it to the tribunal. These are the photocopies of the newspapers which hold the display no: 94-121. The main copy is submitted to the court.
On 24th March, 2011, at 11:30 A.M.- I’ve seized the “Shei Razakar” report series of Daily Janakantha [of 1st March- 31st March, 2001] - in total 27 Newspapers from PIB. This is the seizure list. This is the seizure list; I’ve signed it [Display No- 122/1]. I’ve send the Newspapers to the custody of Mr. Rabiul Anam Khan. This is the custody sheet which holds display number 123. I’ve collected the photocopies of those newspapers and thus submitted it to the tribunal. These are the photocopies of the newspapers (copies of display-92, 93, 122, and 123 have been provided to the defence, since it has been submitted to the tribunal). The main copy has been submitted to the court.
During the period of investigation I’ve collected the candidature sheet of Delwar Hossain Sayeede for the Parliamentary election from the Pirojpur election Office. For the Parliamentary Election of 2008; Delwar Hossain Sayedee has submitted the candidature sheet for the position of Pirojpur-1 seat. I’ve collected the photocopy.
Haider Ali [Prosecutor]: Please mention his name, age and address.
Helal Uddin [Investigation Officer]: This is the candidature sheet and the relevant documents, which consists of 36 pages. The relevant documents include a certificate of Dakhil Examination- 1957. His highest educational degree is- Aleem. That certificate is included here, the date and year of birth is mentioned as 1st February, 1940. There is a duplicate certificate of Aleem Examination-1960. The name has been mentioned here as Abu Naim Mohammad, afterwards which has got a cross mark on the name line, then the name Delwar Hossain Sayedee has been written upward. This certificate got a line which shows that- as on 1st March, 1960 he attains the age 15 years and 3 months. Afterwards which has got a cross mark over it and it has been written down upward that- “19 years and 1 month”.
The chairman did not say anything and allowed prosecution to exhibit the documents.
He has signed an affidavit by the name Allama Delwar Hossain Sayedee. In another document he has signed the same name. He has stated it on the affidavit that –“My highest educational qualification is Aleem. By profession I am a writer.” The submitted Affidavit describes all movable and immovable property of himself and his family members. The income tax statements and the other relevant papers of income tax show that he has used his name as Allama Delwar Hossain Sayedee.The Court is adjourned till 2 P.M.
On 21th September, 2010 at 14:30 P.M.>> I’ve seized the registrar book for the year of 1928 to 1955 of Sarsina Darus Sunnat Madrasa from the Principals Office. This is the seizure list; the page which holds the details of the accused petitioner has been seized. The page of the information from the registrar book about the certificate which has been sent to Sayedee and photocopy of the cover page of the Registrar book has been seized, which holds the display number- 154 and 155.
On 3rd March, 2011; the Police Super, Special Branch, Pirojpur has sent a report to the Coordinator; Investigation Agency about a General Diary and its legal action for the threat of life towards the witness for this case.
On 2007, the Daily Samakal has published a report against Delwar Hossain Sayedee. Thus, Sayedee has challenged the case and filed a defamation petition of 1 crore taka to the Joint District Judge Court, Pirojpur. He has been defeated in the case.
Investigation Officer: On 22 September 2010 at 10:45am I have seized 40 newspapers (Bhorer kagoj) relating to the genocide, torture, looting, crime against humanity and other offences in 1971 since 29.10.2007 to 10.1.2008 from PIB (Press Institute of Bangladesh)
On 12.9.2010 at 10am in presence of witness from the Bhorer Kagoj newspaper I have seized 15 newspapers since 1.11.07 to 15.11.07. I have seized 4 newspapers since 18.11.07 to 21.11.07. I have seized 3 newspapers since 26.11.07 to 28.11.07. I have seized 5 newspapers since 2.12.07 to 6.12.07. Another 2 newspapers have been seized on 8 and 9.12.07. Thus total 37 newspapers were seized by me. After seizing these newspapers I have given all newspaper under the custody of Rabiul Anam khan.
Mizanul Islam( defence): Exhibit no. 158, 162 and 200. These documents are given to the accused during the court period not before.
Exhibit no. 25: On 28.03.12 I have seized 16 newspapers published on 1970 and 1971. These are:
1. Daily Purbadesh 13.11.1970
2. Daily Don 20.12.70
3. Daily Ittefaq 2.3.70 4. Daily Ittefaq 4.3.71 5. Daily Purbadesh 14.3.71
6. Daily Pakistan 13.4.71
7. Daily Azad 14.4.71
8. Daily Pakistan 16.4.71
9. Daily Azad 17.4.71
10. Daily Azad 22.4.71
11. Daily Pakistan 22.4.71
12. Daily Pakistan 26.4.71
13. Daily Pakistan 27.4.71
14. Daily Shongram 13.6.71
15. Daily Pakistan 7.4.71
16. Daily Shongram 7.4.71
I have seized those documents and gave these under the custody of Obaidul Hossain.
Exhibit No 26: I have seized 12 newspapers from Bangla academy and gave it under the custody of Mobarrak Hossain.
1. Daily Pakistan 10 August 1971
2. Daily Pakistan 26 July 1971
3. Daily Azad 8 May 1971
4. Daily Azad 17 June 1971
5. Daily Azad 1 January 1971
6. Daily Azad 2 January 1971
7. Daily Azad 13 January 1972
8. Daily Azad 18 January 1972
9. Daily Azad 19 January 1972
10. Daily Azad 22 January 1972
11. Daily Azad 29 January 1972
12. Daily Azad 31 January 1971
Exhibit no 27: On 3rd April 2011, I have seized 9 newspapers from Bangla Academy and gave it under the custody of Mobarrak Hossain.
1.Daily Pakistan 22 May 1971
2.Daily Pakistan 20 April 1971
3.Daily Sangram 9 June 1971
4.Daily Pakistan 7 November 1971
5.Daily Pakistan 8 November 1971
6.Daily Sangram 13 November 1971
7.Daily Pakistan 3 December1971
8.Daily Pakistan 19 December 1971
9.Daily Pakistan 24 June1971
On 31 March at 11:30, I have seized 13 newspapers. These are the:
1. Daily Azad dated on 2 March 1972.
2. Daily Azad dated on 3 March 1972
3. Daily Azad dated on 6 March 1972
4. Daily Azad dated on 8 March 1972
5 Daily Ittefaque 20 December 1971
6 Daily Ittefaque 21 December 1971
7. Daily Ittefaque 28 December 1971
8. Daily Ittefaque 30 December 1971
9. Daily Ittefaque 7 February 1972
10. Daily Ittefaque 5 December 1972
11.Daily Ittefaque 11 April 1972
12. Ittefaque 16 December 1972
Exhibit no 36: I have seized the documentary of Shahriar Kabir.Justice Nizam: Is there any evidential value of this documentary and drama regarding this case? And what should be the probative value of this document? Please do not submit if these have no probative value.
Haider Ali: I have completed exhibiting the documents. Now do I need to exhibit the books that we are submitting before the trial? Do we need to give copies of these books to the defence. If we give names to the defence they can buy it from market.
Chairman: yes, if these documents are available in market then the defence may collect them. But you should give name. But if any book is rare then you should give copy.
Justice Zaheer: Just refer only to the important pages of the books.
Mizanul Islam: If they submit book before the Tribunal that means this book have probative value and they are relying upon that book. When we were given list of prosecution documents before the trial we thought that it is complete list. We never thought to recheck this with the list submitted to the tribunal. But now from the prosecution submission it is clear that the list before the tribunal and the list given to us are not same. How can the prosecution give us a different list? Moreover merely giving list is not sufficient. If the prosecution wants to submit any book in support of their case the it is clear that they want to rely on them against the accused. So the defence has legal right to get copies of these books before trial.
Justice Zaheer: Did not you get the list of those books?
Haider Ali: My lord, I have given.
Mizanul Islam: These are given just before examination of the Investigation Officer. It was not on the previous list. My lord, please give the copy to us, we will make copy of these books.
Justice Nizam: If it is possible to you to make copy of the books then why not defence?
Justice Zaheer: Mr. Haider Ali, Did you give the list of those copies upon which you rely?
Mizanul Islam: My lord, serial no. 36,37,38,54,58, 42 are not provided to us.
Justice Zaheer: Mr. Haider Ali, did not you give with the formal charge? If you are relying upon these documents then why you did not give copy to the defence.
Prosecution: we are not required to give copies of the books. We could have filed these books under section 19(1) of the Act at the time of arguments. Why we should give copy to the defence.
Justice Zaheer: but you are relying upon these documents.
Prosecution: I will give reply tomorrow.
Then the Court was adjourned.
No comments:
Post a Comment