High Court Division · Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction
Md. Shakhawat v The State
Criminal Misc 51852/2026 · Decided 10 September 2026
The accused-petitioner was one of 196 persons named in a first information report lodged on 13.08.2025 at Badda Police Station under sections 302, 109 and 34 of the Penal Code, 1860, alleging that on 05.08.2024 armed accused attacked a procession of the Anti-discrimination Student Movement and that the informant's younger brother was shot dead. Arrested on 08.12.2025 and refused bail, he obtained a Rule under section 498 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. He relied on the delay in lodging the report, the absence of any specific overt act and bail granted to a co-accused. The State opposed bail because investigation was pending and he might tamper with evidence. The High Court Division noted that no police report had been submitted and found no tangible material showing a risk of interference, tampering or absconding. Considering the length of detention, absence of a specific overt act and parity, it made the Rule absolute and granted bail until disposal of the trial, with liberty to cancel it on misuse.
- Q1
Whether an accused held in custody in a murder case still under investigation should be granted bail where no police report had been filed, no specific overt act was attributed to him and co-accused on a similar footing had been bailed.
- Although investigation lies within the domain of the investigating agency, continued custody since 08.12.2025 without submission of a police report weighed in favour of bail.
- The State's apprehension of interference with investigation or tampering with evidence was rejected in the absence of tangible material on record, and nothing indicated a likelihood of absconding.
- Length of detention, absence of a specific overt act and parity with co-accused standing on a similar footing justified enlarging the accused on bail under section 498 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
- The court concerned remains at liberty to cancel the bail if the accused misuses it in any manner.
Considering the attending facts and circumstances of the case, the length of detention, absence of specific overt act, and parity with co-accused, we are inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
In the court’s own words.
Criminal Misc 51852/2026, as published by the Supreme Court of Bangladesh. 6 pages, with paragraph numbers for citing.
In the Supreme Court of Bangladesh
High Court Division
(Criminal Miscellaneous Jurisdiction)
Present:
Mr. Justice Md. Khairul Alam
And
Mr. Justice Md. Rafizul Islam
Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 51852 of 2026
Md. Shakhawat
………Accused-petitioner
-Versus-
The State
………. Opposite party
Ms. Kaniz Fatema, Advocate
……. For the accused-petitioner
Mr. Md. Masudul Alam Doha, D.A.G.
……… For the opposite party
Heard & Judgment on: 10.09.2026.
Md. Khairul Alam, J:
1This Rule under section 498 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was issued at the instance of the accusedpetitioner, Md. Shakhawat, calling upon the opposite party to show cause as to why the accused-petitioner should not be enlarged on bail in connection with Badda Police Station Case No. 18 dated 13.08.2025 corresponding to G.R. No. 279 of 2025 under sections 302/109/34 of the Penal Code, 1860 now pending in the Court of Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Dhaka and/or pass such other or further order or orders as to this Court may seem fit and proper.
Facts relevant for disposal of this Rule are that on
213.08.2025 one Md. Parvej Rabbi, as Informant lodged a First Information Report with the Badda Police Station implicating the accused-petitioner along with others alleging, inter alia, that on 05.08.2024 at about 2.30 p.m., while a procession of the “Anti-discrimination Student Movement” was staying in front of the BRAC University, situated under Badda Police Station, the accused persons, being armed with various deadly weapons, attacked the procession. At that time, Al-Amin, the younger brother of the informant, received bullets and was first taken to Farazi Hospital, Rampura, and then to Mugda Medical College Hospital, Dhaka, where the on-duty doctor declared him dead. Hence, the F.I.R. On the basis of said F.I.R Badda Police Station Case No. 18 dated 13.08.2025 under sections 302/109/34 of the Penal Code, 1860, was initiated which gave rise to G.R. No. 279 of 2025, and is now pending in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Dhaka and is still pending for investigation. Criminal Misc. No. 51852 of 2026 (498 FIR)
On 08.12.2025, the petitioner was arrested by the
3police in connection with this case and was produced before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Dhaka, who, rejecting the prayer for bail of the petitioner sent him to custody and since then the petitioner has been languishing in custody.
Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner moved before
4this Court and obtained the present Rule.
Ms. Kaniz Fatema, learned Advocate appearing for
5the petitioner, submits that the alleged occurrence took place on 05.08.2024 but the FIR was lodged on 13.08.2025 implicating as many as 196 persons, the petitioner is accused No. 28 and no specific overt act has been attributed to him. He further submits that the informant is not an eye-witness and that the petitioner has been implicated at the instance of his rival. He next submits that co-accused Golam Kibria Tipu who stands on the same footing, is enjoying the privilege of bail. He also submits that there is no chance of absconding or tampering with evidence on the part of the petitioner if he is enlarged on bail. It is further Criminal Misc. No. 51852 of 2026 (498 FIR)
6submitted that till date no police report has been submitted and it is uncertain when the trial will commence.
Mr. Md. Masudul Alam Doha, learned Deputy Attorney-
7General appearing for the State, opposes the Rule and submits that the investigation is still pending and if the petitioner is enlarged on bail there is every possibility of his interfering with the process of investigation and tampering with evidence. He further submits that the offence was allegedly committed in connection with the “Antidiscrimination Student Movement” and, therefore, the petitioner does not deserve bail at this stage.
Heard the learned Counsels for the respective parties,
8perused the application and the materials on record.
From the order passed by the learned Metropolitan
9Sessions Judge, Dhaka, refusing bail, it appears that the prayer was rejected primarily on the ground that the investigation was continuing. The learned Deputy Attorney- General also emphasized the same ground.
It appears that the FIR was lodged on 13.08.2025 and
10till today no police report has been submitted. While Criminal Misc. No. 51852 of 2026 (498 FIR)
11investigation is a matter within the domain of the investigating agency, the fact remains that the petitioner has been in custody since 08.12.2025 and no charge-sheet has yet been submitted. From the materials on record, we do not find any tangible material to substantiate the apprehension expressed by the learned Deputy Attorney-General regarding interference with investigation or tampering with evidence. We also do not find any material indicating likelihood of absconding on the part of the petitioner. Moreover, co-accused standing on similar footing have already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the attending facts and circumstances of
12the case, the length of detention, absence of specific overt act, and parity with co-accused, we are inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail.
In the result, the Rule is made absolute.
The petitioner, Md. Shakhawat, son of Idris Ali
13Ghatak, is granted bail till disposal of the trial upon furnishing bail bond to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Dhaka. Criminal Misc. No. 51852 of 2026 (498 FIR)
The concerned Court, however, shall be at liberty to
14cancel the bail of the petitioner if he misuses the privilege of bail in any manner whatsoever. Communicate this order immediately.
Md. Rafizul Islam, J
I agree.
15Kashem, B.O Criminal Misc. No. 51852 of 2026 (498 FIR)
Related summaries.
From the record to your case.
Our advocates appear before both divisions of the Supreme Court. These are the practice areas that handle matters like this one.
- Supreme Court practice in BangladeshSlips, mentioning, cause lists and appearances→
- Case JourneysHow a case moves through the courts, step by step→
- Limitation and appeal deadline calculatorKnow your last day to file→
- Curative petitions in BangladeshFinality, article 104 and the case for reform→
- Constitution guideEvery article and amendment, animated→
- Bangladesh legal glossaryBangla and English legal terms, explained→
