National, Back Page

Graft case against ex-CJ

Courts record statements of Sinha’s brother, nephews

Published : 16 May 2022 09:47 PM | Updated : 17 May 2022 01:55 PM

Elder brother and two nephews of former Chief Justice (CJ) Surendra Kumar (SK) Sinha on Monday submitted their statements as prosecution witnesses under section 164 in a case against the ex-CJ filed for amassing illegal wealths.

The three prosecution witnesses (PWs) are Surendra Kumar Sinha's elder brother Narendra Kumar Sinha, nephews Shankhajit Sinha and Sujon Kumar Sinha.

Of the trio, Narendra submitted his statement before the court of Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Md Mamunur Rashid, Shankhajit submitted his statement before the court of Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Mohammad Jasim and Sujon submitted his statement at the court of Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Mehedi Hasan.

Deputy Director of Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) Md Gulshan Anwar filed the case against SK Sinha for amassing wealth of Taka 7.14 crore on his brother and relative's names through misuse of power, transferring and handing over the money, on October 10, 2021.

Today was fixed for submitted report in the case, but the anti-graft body failed to do this. Dhaka Metropolitan Sessions Judge KM Imrul Qayesh later set June 16 for submitting the report.

Read More: SK Sinha case awaits verdict

According to the case documents, the SK Sinha during his tenure as the chief justice took a plot from Rajuk in Uttara Residential Area. Later by misuse of power, he took another three-katha plot of his brother Narendra Kumar Sinha's name in Rajuk Purbachal Project. He later made the three-katha plot to a five-katha one and shifted the plot from Purbachal to Uttara Sector four.

The ex-Chief Justice SK Sinha is accused of giving power of attorney for this plot to one of his nephews Shankhajit Sinha.

The ACC in its probe found that the former chief justice paid Taka 75 lakh to Rajuk against this plot and raised a nine-storey complex on it at a cost of Taka 6.31 crore. The anti-graft body in its case said they did not find any legal source of earning for the money used in buying the plot and developing the apartment complex.

Related Topics