The case in favor of government
is that the victim Nobab Foisunnesa, examinee of H. S. C, 1995 as having been
examinee she used the road of college, the defendant- 1 used to pay love as the
victim did not response on the date of incident 6/ 4/ 1999 in Tuesday at around
11 PM as the victim Fazilatunnesa and younger sister having to have response to
nature near of Vita in roof less bathroom as the younger sister of victim Rabea
Awshor standing beside with Harrican when she came out from bathroom 1 and 2 defendant of
the case threw A bottle of acid on the face of victim Fazilatunnesa. So the
face of victim burnt as the both eyes may spoil forever. Another sister the
witness recognized the defendant as having been light of the Harrican on her
hand so she screamed and the defendants fled by running. The victim got
admitted at Laksham
Government Hospital .
As the condition was serious she had taken to Cumilla
Medical Hospital
and when the condition got downgraded she took to Dhaka Medical
College Hospital .
The treatment is continuing there.
Defendant Md
Hossen said in his written speech I studied at Luksham having been lodging. As
I was examinee of Kamil they involved me in the case, victim Fazilatunnesa
lived at her uncle’s home named paradise in Luksham. Defendant Hemayat Ullah
lived at the same house. Tahmina also lived at the same home. No investigation
has been done of the father and mother of the victim in that case. The
investigation officer even has not went in the Madrasa also. Victim
Fazilatunnessa is working at Acid Survival Foundation. Her eyes are spoiled. Defendant Md
Hossen mentioned that in his written speech. As investigating the defendant his
case the description goes like that
the defendant has not thrown acid. There was love relation with the victim with
a number of boys, someone among them may did it. Then the victim has been taken
to Homio Doctor. One bottle of medicine when used on the injury of victim the
stain has made on the face.
As mentioned the suit above
defendant Md Hossen and against Hemayat Ullah under the section of A, B, C of 5
of Women and Children Suppression law and under the regulation of 14 as the defendants heard the
hearing he claimed as free of guilty. Then in the court, in favor of government,
10 witnesses have been investigated. After the completion of witness of the
government the defendant Md Hossen has been examined under the section of 342
of Civil Law. During the examination the defendant claimed himself guilty free
and no witness will give in the court informed. When asked on anything will
you, he shows on the court three pages of written speech and some paper cutting
and pictures as well. Another defendant Hemayat Ullah is fled so that it was
not possible to ask him anything. Learned advocate in favor of the government
directing the case of Hemayat Ullah Himu. Defendant Himu is not involved with
the incident. And he was not presented at the incident. It is told that when it is said
that not to hug freely and because previous enemy relation the defendant Himu
has been involved in this case.
No comments:
Post a Comment