• Wrongful Detention and Acquittal of Shahadat Ali Khan Rafiq

Mohammad Nazim Uddin, an officer of the detainee section of Barishal District Central Jail, informed the staff from BLAST Barisal Unit that on November 23, 2024, a prisoner named Shahadat Ali Khan Rafiq (44 years old, male, laborer) was admitted to the jail. However, it was not mentioned in custody records whether he was a detainee or a convicted prisoner, nor was there any information about the court handling his case. The prison authorities tried to resolve the issue but, failing to find a solution, sought assistance from the staff. The staff from BLAST reviewed the prison register and interviewed the detainee to collect all relevant personal information.

The detainee was arrested on November 23, 2024, in connection with Kaunia GR Case No. 224/16. After his arrest, he was unaware of whether he was a detainee or a convict and did not know which court was handling his trial. As a result, neither his family nor the prison authorities knew how to proceed with the case. Under these circumstances, the prison authorities sought legal assistance from staff of BLAST.

The detainee was accused in a drug-related case under Kaunia Police Station GR No. 224/16 and arrested on November 23, 2024. However, neither he nor his family knew what charges had been filed against him or how to navigate the legal process. Despite the prison authorities’ repeated efforts, contacting the relevant court did not lead to any resolution.

Through the prison authorities, all information about the detainee was collected. After gathering the details, the issue was discussed with the District Project Officer, Adv Shahida Talukdar who advised the staff. The first step was to collect case documents from the relevant court or institution.

On the first day, when the staff visited the GR section for case details, they discovered that a different name was recorded in the accused section under the same case number. Although the case number, section, and filing date were correct, the name of the accused did not match. By checking the GR section’s register, it was found that the case had been transferred to a higher court for trial.

On the second day, when they contacted the higher court, the authorities stated that they had no record of the case under that number. There was no register or case list for that year either.

On the third day, the staff revisited the GR section, checked the register again, and returned to the relevant court. Discussions with the court clerk and computer operator led to another search for the case, but no solution was found.

On the fourth day, they approached the record section of the Metropolitan Magistrate’s office, where the officer responsible conducted a search and found that the case had already been adjudicated. When the record keeper retrieved the documents, they noticed discrepancies in the accused’s name. There was no mention of Shahadat Ali Khan Rafiq in the case files.

Upon reviewing the arrest warrant, they contacted the court that had issued it. The presiding judge summoned the staff and instructed them to provide case details. After reviewing the information and incident report presented by the staff, the judge immediately asked the bench assistant to check for a supplementary case file and present it without delay if found. When the bench assistant presented the file, it became evident that Shahadat Ali Khan Rafiq was not listed as an accused in the case, yet he had been sentenced in the matter.

Several obstacles were encountered in handling this case. First, there was no detailed information about the case in the prison records, and the detainee himself had no knowledge of the charges against him. Multiple visits to the GR section and the relevant court were required. At times, court staff, including the bench assistant and GR officers, delayed the process by asking them to return later. No judicial institution had any information on the case, and even records or case lists from that year were not provided by the officials concerned. The staff received no clues regarding the case. Despite these challenges, they remained persistent in their efforts to resolve the matter.

After thoroughly reviewing all aspects of the case, the presiding judge ordered the necessary corrections and directed that a copy of the order be sent to prison on January 29, 2025.

The petitioner was acquitted in Kaunia GR Case No. 224/16, a false case. Upon being freed from the case, he felt a great sense of relief and lightness. His family also experienced financial and emotional relief. Mr. Sahadat said that no one else must endure such an ordeal in the future.

The staff’s initiative played a crucial role in uncovering the wrongful imprisonment of Shahadat Ali Khan Rafiq, who was not the actual accused in the case. Despite extensive searches, no records of his case were found in the judicial system, making it nearly impossible for him or his family to seek legal recourse. His family, already struggling financially, lacked the necessary legal knowledge to navigate the complexities of the case. Through persistent efforts, BLAST’s staff identified the error, facilitated the legal process, and ultimately secured his release, ensuring justice for an innocent individual.

The intervention by BLAST’s staff team played a crucial role in ensuring justice and correcting a severe miscarriage of law. This case serves as a significant precedent for future legal aid interventions in Bangladesh’s criminal justice system.

• PRISONER AWARENESS PROGRAMMES

Under the IRSOP project, paralegals have conducted 1,475 paralegal aid clinic sessions inside prisons with 34,742 prisoners, amongst whom 21,789 were men and 12,953 were women.

Also paralegals are disseminate the flyer, leaflet and TV show on govt. legal aid for the awareness of prisoners. As well as assist to the prison authority to celebrate the different national days in prison for creating awareness among the prisoners.

• INTERVENTIONS and Released AT PRISONS

i) Support inside Prisons: The paralegals provided legal assistance to the poor and vulnerable justice seekers inside prisons. Under the JPR project, a total of 132,406 prisoners were assisted inside prison. A total of 18,448 prisoners were released from prison through the legal assistance provided by the Paralegals and a total of 630,349 interventions were made by the Paralegals for prisoners inside prison.

ii) Paralegals also worked at (CDCs): The Paralegals was extended to different Child Development Centres (CDC) in Gazipur and Jashore. During the project period, a total of 639 Children were supported on various issues, such as – legal representation, collecting case-related information from the court, communication with lawyers, contact with family, and collecting the sureties. A total of 1,111 interventions were made that included some pre and post-release interventions such as collecting case-related information and documents from the court, referring cases to Panel lawyer and DLAC, collecting prisoners’ signature on Vokalatnama, contacting prisoners’ families and providing pre and post-release feedback, making regular follow ups with lawyers etc. A total of 78 children were released from CDC and were handed over to their guardians.

iii) Rehabilitation of Released Prisoners: Department of Social Welfare had some funds for the rehabilitation of released prisoners but that was not used. Following a decision taken by the CCC, the allocated fund was used to rehabilitate released prisoners by providing Electronic Machinery Tools, Sewing Machines, Domestic Animals and Cash for small business purposes.

iv) Established Referral Mechanism from Prison to DLAC: The Paralegals able to establish a fruitful referral mechanism from prison to DLAC. The Paralegals collected information inside the prison and filled up a prescribed legal aid form and finally referred to DLAC through the prison authority. This is to be mentioned that the paralegals provided important support in the documentation and appointment of lawyers of DLAC.