The High Court said on Tuesday that law enforcement agency members cannot keep a citizen in their custody for long without producing an arrested person in court or taking them in remand following legal procedures.
鈥楲egal process must be followed to keep a person in police custody,鈥� the bench of Justice Mustafa Zaman Islam and Justice SM Masud Hossain Dolan remarked during the hearing of a writ petition filed by two Supreme Court lawyers seeking the release of six student coordinators of the ongoing student movement for quota reform.
Supreme Court lawyers Aynunnahar Siddiqua and Manzur-Al-Matin filed the writ petition on Monday, seeking a directive for the government and the police to produce the six students in court.
They also sought a court directive on law enforcement members to stop the use of live bullets on agitating quota reform protesters.
The court adjourned the hearing of the writ petition until Wednesday morning.
The hearing was adjourned as additional attorney general Sk Md Morshed sought time to place an argument by attorney general AM Amin Uddin, who was scheduled to return to the country later on Tuesday.聽
The two petitioners sought directives on the secretaries of the law and home ministries, the chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, the inspector general of the police, the chief of the Army Staff, the chief of the Naval Staff, and the chief of the Air Force.
During their arguments on Tuesday, the second day of the hearing, senior lawyers Aneek R Haque, Tobarok Hossain, and Sara Hossain faced the wrath of the pro-Awami League lawyers, mostly government law officers.
At least 10 pro-AL lawyers argued and vehemently opposed the writ petition in the two hours of the hearing.
They also wanted to know, from the right lawyers, the documents of at least 213 people who were killed during the movement, as mentioned in the petition.聽
The court abruptly left the packed courtroom at about 1:00pm without finishing the argument of a pro-government lawyer and asked the rights group lawyers to reply to the government鈥檚 argument on Wednesday.
The pro-government lawyers called the right lawyers 鈥榠nstigators鈥� of the student movement.
Appearing for the six students, Sara Hossain argued that there was no scope in the law for confining the six students in the custody of the DB.
DB admitted that the six students were in its custody, but did not show them arrested or present them in court.聽
鈥楨ven for the execution of a person, a legal process must be followed,鈥� Sara argued.聽
The six students of different universities were kept in the custody of the detective branch of the Dhaka Metropolitan Police after they were picked between July 26 and July 27.聽
DMP DB chief Harun-or-Rashid posted on social media on Sunday photographs of him taking a meal with the six detained student leaders鈥擭ahid Islam, Abu Baker Mazumdar, Asif Mahmud, Sarjis Alam, Hasnat Abdullah, and Nusrat Tabassum.
Opposing the petition, ruling Awami League lawmaker Nurul Islam Sujan argued that there was a conspiracy involving the student movement, and a third party took advantage to carry out sabotage.
Arguing for the petitioner, Aneek Haque said that law enforcers did not follow the provisions of the Police Regulations of Bengal 1943 and the Police Act 1861 while firing on the demonstrators during the student movement.
As Aneek emotionally drew the court鈥檚 attention to the reported killing of a Narayanganj child by receiving a bullet on the rooftop of his residence, the court said, 鈥榃e are ashamed; such a kind of death is not acceptable.鈥�
Aneek told the court that lawyers come to the court seeking directives on law enforcers to follow their own laws while dealing with mob gatherings.聽
Additional attorney general SM Munir argued that the police fired on the demonstrators, following all the laws of the country.
Munir鈥檚 colleague, Sk Md Morshed, argued that police had the right to fire on criminals as per the United Nations Convention on Human Rights.
Morshed argued that there was no document suggesting that six coordinators were held in custody illegally.
Additional attorney general Mehedi Hassan Chowdhury argued that the two petitioners in the case and their lawyers had lost their credibility as they are all members of the national mass inquiry commission headed by Justice Md Abdul Matin that was formed on Monday by a vested group to investigate the killings during the student movements.