Testimony of Akib Reza Khan

My name is Akib Reza Khan, age 26. My father is xx, and my mother is xx. My permanent address is XX Mymensingh. I am currently working as a freelance consultant.

At the time of the incident, I was a third-year student in the EEE Department at Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur. I did not directly participate in the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement that formed on July 1, 2024. However, I joined the movement on July 14, 2024. On the night of July 14, during a press conference, former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina responded to a journalist’s question by stating, “Will the quota go to the children of freedom fighters, or will the children and grandchildren of Razakars get it?” I was deeply hurt by such a derogatory statement. I observed that students from various universities, including Dhaka University, began holding processions and giving slogans in protest. Around 12:00 AM, my friend S.M. Ashiqur Rahman and I called for a protest procession against this statement to be held at Gate No. 1 of Begum Rokeya University. Within a short time, many students gathered. Initially, there were 50 to 60 of us, but the number increased rapidly. We began giving slogans and marched from Begum Rokeya University Gate No. 1 to Gate No. 2, passing Chawkbazar Modern Mor and in front of Lalbagh Carmichael College, before returning to stand in front of the University’s main gate. We concluded the procession with slogans and returned home for the night.

On July 15, 2024, we observed that while students from Dhaka University and other educational institutions were conducting the Anti-Discrimination Student Movement, terrorists from the Chhatra League and various associate organizations of the Awami League attacked their peaceful processions. They beat and injured innocent students.

As a protest against this attack, S.M. Ashiqur Rahman, Shahriar Sohag, and I decided to hold a protest rally on July 16, 2024, at 10:00 AM in front of Gate No. 1 of Begum Rokeya University. On the morning of July 16, at 10:00 AM, we began the protest rally in front of Gate No. 1. Students from various educational institutions in the Rangpur metropolitan area, such as Carmichael College, Lions College, and Rangpur Polytechnic Institute, participated in this rally. Many students from different institutions marched and gathered in front of Gate No. 1. I arrived there around 12:00 PM with my friend Rawnak. Shortly after our arrival, students from other institutions arrived, chanting slogans using a microphone attached to a rickshaw. Some students residing in the halls of Begum Rokeya University were being confined and were not allowed to join the movement. Activists from the Chhatra League and the Awami League had detained them.

Prosecutor: What was the role of the administration?

Objection raised by the Defense Counsel Aminul Gani Titu: My Lord, the Prosecution cannot ask leading questions here. The witness is being influenced.

Mr. Judge Md. Manjurul Basit, Member: Look, Counsel, this isn’t strictly a leading question. It could be called a suggestive question. There are often suggestions within questions. It is not a leading question regarding the factual uncovering of the event. Please proceed.

When we attempted to enter through Gate No. 1 of Begum Rokeya University, the police obstructed us. On the opposite side of the gate, we observed some university administration officers, employees, and teachers stationed there. Leaders and activists of the Chhatra League were also with them. Among the notable leaders present were Begum Rokeya University Chhatra League President Pomel Barua, General Secretary Shamim Mahfuz, as well as Dhanonjoy Kumar Tagor, Babul Hossain, Masidul Hasan, Imran Chowdhury Akash, Akter, Fazle Rabbi, Sohag, and many others.

Subsequently, when we were unable to enter, an altercation occurred with the police. The university administration was absent from the scene. Announcements were being made over the microphone urging everyone to assemble peacefully, but suddenly, we observed the commencement of sound grenade deployment and baton charges. Simultaneously, tear gas shells were fired. Consequently, the students became somewhat dispersed. I then crossed the road divider and moved to the eastern side. The police then targeted us, continuing to fire tear gas and charge with batons. In the midst of this, AC Arifuzzaman, accompanied by other police officers, began beating Abu Sayed with batons. They struck him on his hands, legs, head, and both the front and back of his body.

Following this, all police personnel retreated, entering through Gate No. 1, and closed the gate. From inside the gate, leaders and activists of the Chhatra League and Awami League associate organizations, along with university teachers Mashiur Rahman, Asaduzzaman, Robiul Hassan, Mostafizur, and employees Nurunnabi, Nurul Alam Mia, Apel, Amu, and many others, hurled brickbats at us. After the police had entered the premises, the students attempted to reassemble in front of Gate No. 1 and tried to gain entry. Other students and I pushed against Gate No. 1 in an attempt to open it, and eventually, it was opened. As soon as it opened, the police fired shotgun rounds and tear gas shells. When the bullets began to hit us, we moved away from the gate and took position on the eastern side of the divider. At that moment, brother Abu Sayed moved to the western side of the divider and called upon the remaining students to assemble. However, the police were exiting through Gate No. 1 while firing continuously. Seeing this, Abu Sayed stood his ground with both arms raised and outstretched. He held only a small, thin stick in his hand. He stood in a surrender pose to signal the police not to shoot. Nevertheless, the police took aim and fired at him with shotguns from close range.

ASI Md. Amir Hossain fired the first shot, and Constable Sujan Chandra Roy fired the second. Subsequently, Abu Sayed lost his balance and moved from the western side of the divider to the eastern side. Seeing him, Ayan ran over. As Ayan tried to hold him and take him away, Abu Sayed fell down again. Observing this, Rawnak, who was nearby, along with two or three other students, rushed over to help remove Abu Sayed and the others. The police continued firing shotguns and launching tear gas. After moving a short distance, Rawnak and the other students struggled to carry Abu Sayed further. I then ran forward and grabbed hold of Abu Sayed. Together, we carried him in our arms toward Gate No. 2 of Begum Rokeya University, near the Park Mor. Blood was streaming from his head and all over his body. He was unconscious at that time. We placed him onto a rickshaw. Two individuals accompanied Abu Sayed; one of them was Saju. They set off for Rangpur Medical College. I do not recall the name of the other individual. Wearing my blood-stained shirt, I sat in front of the Park View Mess, in a state of shock and disbelief. The police and Chhatra League members then arrived and chased us. We retreated towards Kurigram Road. Subsequently, members of the Chhatra League and Awami League organizations chased us multiple times wielding indigenous weapons, iron rods, Chinese axes, and sticks. These chases continued for approximately an hour. We were unarmed. At approximately 3:30 PM, I learned that the young man, a student of the English Department at Begum Rokeya University named Abu Sayed- had passed away. Upon hearing this news, I was stunned and returned home.

Due to the irresponsibility, negligence, and lack of appropriate action by the Begum Rokeya University administration, specifically the VC, Proctor, the teachers, officials and employees; police and Chatra League were emboldened and found the opportunity to attack the students. I demand a fair trial for those involved in the killing of Abu Sayed, and I pray that my younger brother receives justice. The Investigating Officer has interrogated me; this is my deposition.

Cross-Examination by the Defense Counsel Azizur Rahman (In favour of Present Accused no. 8- Amir Hossain, 9- Sujan Chandra Roy):

I did not count the total number of times the shotguns were fired. At the time the shotguns were being fired, my distance from the police personnel was approximately 30 to 35 yards. At that time, Abu Sayed was 10 to 15 yards away from me. I possess no specific knowledge regarding the ranks of the Bangladesh Police. The ranks of the police personnel present inside Gate No. 1 were unknown to me at that time. I cannot specify exactly how long I remained in front of Gate No. 1. I cannot state the exact time when the tear gas shells or sound grenades were deployed. When Abu Sayed was subjected to the baton charge, I was approximately 20 to 25 yards away from him.

I did not submit my blood-stained shirt to the Investigating Officer. Three to four shotgun pellets struck my body, but they caused no serious damage. I did not seek any medical treatment for these injuries. It is not true that I gave false testimony regarding the blood-stained shirt. Abu Sayed was subjected to a baton charge for two to three minutes. I cannot say who handed the small, thin stick to Abu Sayed or where he obtained it. The injured Abu Sayed did not fall from the grasp of Rawnak and his other companions even once.

 

It is not true that Abu Sayed fell once while being carried away in his injured state. There were two to three people beside me when I was holding Abu Sayed. One of them is named Azizur; he is my friend. I do not recall the names of the others. I cannot state at this moment exactly when or how many of us dispersed towards Kurigram Road. I was present at the scene from 12:00 PM to 3:30 PM. I went home at approximately 4:30 PM after hearing the news of the death. It is not true that, coached by others, I implicated the names of the accused and provided false testimony against the accused Amir Hossain and Sujan Chandra Roy.

Cross-Examination of PW- 12 Akib Reza Khan by the Defense Counsel Ataul Ghoni Titu representing Accused no. 10-Md. Shoriful Islam continues

Witness: Shahriar Sohag, as the coordinator, informed everyone, including Abu Sayeed, about the program on the 16th.

Defense: You said in your deposition that he (Abu Sayeed) stood with his arms wide open so that the police would not shoot again. (Defense reads this part from the deposition.)

Defense suggestion: You have distorted history and presented the heroic Abu Sayeed in a demeaning way to the Tribunal.

(An objection is raised by Mizanul Islam.)

Mizanul Islam: The witness has given his opinion in the deposition. The defense cannot ask for an opinion in cross-examination.

Defense suggestion: Then let this suggestion be taken this way — you have belittled the heroic history of Abu Sayeed by showing it as a gesture of surrender, out of jealousy.

Prosecution: This will not be accepted.

Tribunal: You (defense) can bring these up during the arguments if you want.

Defense: Can you tell me if there was a Messenger group for the Mohanagar anti-quota movement?
Witness: I cannot say whether there was a Messenger group for the Mohanagar anti-quota movement.

Defense: Was there a Messenger group for anti-quota movement-Rangpur.

Witness: I do not know if there was a Messenger group for the anti-quota movement- Rangpur.

Defense: Were you connected to the Initiative Telegram group?
Witness: I do not remember if I was a member of the Initiative Telegram group.

Defense: Did you post anything in the previously mentioned groups between July 16 and August 5, 2024?
Witness: I do not remember.

Prosecution: He has already denied the previous one. He said he is unable to say whether there was a group, so how does the question of a post arise?

Afterwards, this part was dropped.

Defense: Did you know this Ayan before 16/07/2024?
Witness: No.

Defense: Did you know him (Ayan) by this name(Ayan) when Abu Sayeed was being held?
Witness: No.

Defense: When did you get to know him?
Witness: I do not remember the exact date, but I got acquainted with him later.

Defense: After Abu Sayeed’s murder, have you spoken to Shahriar Sohag or S.M. Ashikur Rahman about his murder?
Witness: Yes.

Defense: After 16/07/2024, did you speak to Arman Hossain, a student of the Math Department of Begum Rokeya University, about Abu Sayeed’s murder before this deposition?
Witness: We met and talked in general, but we did not have any specific conversation about Abu Sayeed’s murder.

Defense: Have you spoken to Imran of the Odhikar Parishad^[1] about this matter?
Witness: No.

Prosecution: There is no opportunity to ask questions about these things. What was discussed with which witness is not in the chief examination. Questions cannot be asked about these matters. The prosecution directed to rule 53.

The defense said  that earlier, in 2013, when the tribunal’s proceedings were going on, when the defense conducted cross-examination, the prosecution could not obstruct like this, they did not obstruct. Then Mizanur Rahman says that this law was made later to obstruct me. Earlier, the prosecution did not stop the defense during cross-examination. But later the rule was made.

The chairman sir says that our past is not very beautiful. Earlier, many times the witnesses who came to testify were kept confined. Witnesses were made to disappear, even for up to 16 years.

Defense: Where did Rownak study?
Witness: Rownak was my classmate. He studied with me, in my department, in my year, at Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur.

Defense: Did Abdus Shafique of Rangpur Begum Rokeya University give a speech on the rickshaw’s mike in the evening?
Witness: I do not know.

Defense: There were no bloodstains on the clothes you were wearing at the time of the incident.
Witness: This is not true.

Defense: You did not hold Abu Sayeed in your arms.
Witness: This is not true.

Defense: Did you know that the administrative building of the university is under CCTV surveillance?
Witness: I do not know if it is under surveillance, but it could be.

Defense:The words you mentioned in your deposition, such as “the proctor’s irresponsibility, lack of sufficient effort, and negligence,” were taught to you.
Witness: This is not true.

Defense: Proctor Shariful Islam always communicated with and helped the students of the anti-discrimination student movement.
Witness: I do not know that.

Defense: On 11/7/2024, did he, the Proctor, give an interview in favor of the students of the anti-discrimination student movement?
Witness: I cannot say.

Defense: You have given a false deposition in this tribunal by mixing lies with some truth.
Witness: This is not true.

Defense Counsel Sheikh Mustabhi Hassan representing Accused no. 13-Rafiul Hasan Rasel adopted cross-examination 10 and declined further cross-examination.

State Defense Lawyer Md.Salauddin representing Accused no. 23 and 29, adopted cross-examination 10.

Defense: Do you know about the Chhatra League committee?
Witness: Yes, I knew that there was a committee.

Defense: Did you know the members of the committee?
Witness: I know a few names.

Defense: Did you know about the posts of the members of the Chhatra League committee — who held which post?
Witness: No.

Defense: Have you seen the committee’s list?
Witness: The committee’s list was not published on Facebook.

Defense: Did you see the name of Imran Chowdhury Akash on that list?
Witness: I do not remember whether I saw the name of Imran Chowdhury Akash on that list.

Defense: Which batch is he from?
Witness: As far as I remember, he is a student of this university, from the same batch as mine.

Defense: Which department?
Witness: I do not remember.

Defense: On the day of the incident, when you saw Imran Chowdhury Akash, how far was he from you?
Witness: I cannot say exactly, but it was a time during chase and counter-chase.

Defense: When the gate is closed, can you see outside from inside?
Witness: No, you cannot see inside from outside when the gate is closed.

Defense: When you wanted to enter through gate number one of Rokeya University, the police stopped you. Was the gate closed or open at that time?
Witness: It was closed.

Defense: How many officers and employees of the university were at the gate?
Witness: I cannot say the exact number.

Defense: In which department did Anwar Parvez Pavel work?
Witness: I do not know.

Defense suggestion: You gave false testimony knowing that Imran Chowdhury alias Akash and Anwar Parvez were not present.
Witness: It is not true that I gave false testimony knowing that Imran Chowdhury alias Akash and Anwar Parvez were not present.

State Defense Lawyer Mamun-Ur-Rashid representing absconding Accused no. 16-Pomel Barua, 17-22, 24 adopted cross-examinations 8, 9 and 10.

Defense: How many student organizations are active in Begum Rokeya University?
Witness: I do not know (I am unable to answer this).

Defense: At the time of the incident, were you a member of any student organization^[2]?
Witness: At the time of the incident, I was not a member of any student organization.

Defense: You have given false testimony with malicious intent involving my witnesses because you were not given an important post in the Chhatra League committee of Begum Rokeya University.
Witness: It is not true that I gave false testimony with malicious intent involving the accused because I was not given an important post in the Chhatra League committee of Begum Rokeya University.

State Defense Lawyer, Israt Ony, appearing for accused numbers 2 to 7, adopted cross-examinations 8, 9, and 10.

Defense: When there was a heated argument with the police, were brickbats thrown at the police by the protesters?
Witness: I cannot say.

Defense: It was being announced on the mike that everyone should remain calm and hold the assembly peacefully. Who was making this announcement?
Witness: I cannot say who was making it, but it was one of the students.

Defense: At what time did you see sound grenades being thrown ?
Witness: Around 12:30 or 1:00 PM, sound grenades were suddenly thrown.

Defense: How many sound grenades were thrown?
Witness: I cannot say.

Defense: Did you know those who were baton-charging?
Witness: I did not know everyone, but I can name one person, AC Arifuzzaman.

Defense: How did you know AC Arifuzzaman?
Witness: I saw a video later and came to know that this person was AC Arifuzzaman.

Defense: Did you submit this video or the video link to the tribunal or the IO?
Witness: No, I saw this video in the public domain, but I did not submit it to the IO.

Defense: Were you hit by rubber bullets on your body?
Witness: Yes, on my chest and stomach.

Defense: When Abu Sayeed was standing with his hands outstretched, did you see anyone throwing brickbats from behind?
Witness: No, they did not.

Defense suggestion: Abu Sayeed died from the injury caused by brickbats thrown from behind.
Witness: This is not true.

State Defense Lawyer, Sujat Mia representing absconding Accused no. 1-Prof. Hasibur Rahman, 11-Hafizur Rahman, 12-Sarwar Hossain, 14 and 30, adopted cross-examination 10.

State Defense Lawyer Md. Shahidul Islam representing absconding Accused no. 15-Amin Hossain, 25, 26, 27 and 28 adopted cross-examination 10.

Defense: Do you know if all activities of the university were off on 16/07/2024?
Witness: I do not know.

Defense: Where did you keep your blood-stained shirt?

Witness: The shirt is with me, but it is now in the prosecutor’s room.^[3]

Prosecutor Mizanul Islam: I will conduct a re-examination.

Witness: I mistakenly mentioned Robiul Hasan’s name in the deposition; his actual name is Rafiul Hasan.

Then the defense Counsel Sheikh Mustabhi Hassan representing Accused no. 13-Rafiul Hasan Rasel conducts a further cross-examination.

Defense: What was Rafiul’s post?
Witness: I do not know. I just know that he was an official.

Defense: When brickbats were being thrown from inside the gate, where was Rafiul Hasan?
Witness: He was inside.

Defense: Was the gate closed or open at that time?
Witness: At that time, the gate was being opened and closed intermittently. Besides, I have also seen the CCTV camera footage of gate number one.

Defense suggestion: You first said “Robiul,” and later corrected it as instructed by the IO.
Witness: This is not true.