& çâÌæÚUæð´ ·¤è ¥ôÚU Îð¹Ùæ ÁæÚUè ÚU¹ð´ ¥ÍæüÌ ¥ÂÙð ÜÿØ ÂÚU ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´Ð ãæÚU Ù ×æÙð´, €UØô´ç·¤ ·¤æ× ·¤ÚUÙð âð ¥æÂ·¤ô ©gðàØ ·¤è Âýæç# ãôÌè ãñ ¥õÚU ÁèßÙ ·¤æ ¹æÜèÂÙ ÎêÚU ãôÌæ ãñÐ ÖÜð ãè ÁèßÙ ×ð´ ç·¤ÌÙè Öè ·¤çÆÙæ§ü €UØô´ Ù ¥æ°, çÁ™ææâæ ¥õÚU ©ˆâæã ÕÙæ° ÚU¹ð´Ð ŠØæÙ ÚU¹ð´, ÜÿØ ã×ðàææ ¥æÂ·Ô¤ Âæâ ãôÌð ãñ´ çÁ‹ãð´ ÂæÙð ·Ô¤ çÜ° ÂýØæâ ¥æÂ ·¤Öè Öè àæéM¤ ·¤ÚU â·¤Ìð ãñ´Ð

Plea to remove Justice Manik

Mahmudur submits complaints to SC

Staff Correspondent
The acting editor of daily Amar Desh yesterday brought allegations against Justice AHM Shamsuddin Choudhury Manik of "violating laws and committing misconduct".
Mahmudur Rahman placed his complaints along with an appeal for
the removal of the High Court judge through an application he submitted to the Supreme Court registrar
SEE PAGE 6 COL 1 FROM PAGE 1 yesterday for forwarding to the Supreme Judicial Council.
The SJC is comprised of the chief justice and two senior judges of the SC Appellate Division and is empowered to probe allegations against any judge.
A total of 29 allegations were brought against Justice Manik, a press release from the newspaper office said. They include violation of laws on money laundering prevention and foreign currency exchange and concealing wealth information.
The HC judge had bought three houses in London, showing the costs at Tk 40 lakh, despite paying many times higher, the statement read, adding that he had not
mentioned any account or source of this “extra money” in income tax papers submitted in London.
The HC judge has provided the wrong address about one of the houses and concealed his wealth information before the London authorities, the press release said, citing Rahman's statements in the application.
Justice Manik had another residence in London other than the three houses mentioned in his tax record, according to the press release. The record says nothing about sending the money from Bangladesh to London.
Citing the allegations brought by Rahman, the release said there was no scope for sending so much
money directly out of Bangladesh as per foreign currency exchange and money laundering laws.
Rahman also claimed Justice Manik had committed misconduct by making political statements against the opposition political parties and in favour of the ruling party through participating on different television talk shows in London.
On June 18, an HC bench led by Justice Manik issued a contempt of court rule against Mahmudur Rahman, for publishing a "false report" on the judge's UK residences.
The same day, three prominent lawyers — Rokanuddin Mahmud, Shafiuddin Ahmed and Ruhul Quddus Kazal -- told the bench that
Justice Manik was appointed an HC judge after he had bought the residences in 1981,1982 and 1983.
Echoing their views, Justice Manik said that what he had earned during his student and professional life in London was enough to purchase the houses.
Later, the Appellate Division stayed the order of the HC bench.
Sources closed to Justice Manik said the judge on August 23 served a legal notice through his solicitors in London, asking Rahman to apologise for the report and not to repeat such “untrue and defamatory” allegations against him.
Yesterday, SC Registrar AKM Shamsul Islam told The Daily Star that his office had received the application from Mahmudur Rahman, but he had no authority to place such an application before the SJC members as per the constitution.
He said if there was any allegation against a judge, it had to be placed before the Supreme Judicial Council through the president.
Oliullah Noman, a reporter of Amar Desh, said he had submitted a copy of the application on behalf of Mahmudur Rahman to Bangabhaban, official residence of the president, over the sending of the allegations to the SJC.
But Nesar Uddin Bhuiyan, press secretary to the president, said his office had not received such an application.
Meanwhile, Law Minister Shafique Ahmed told The Daily Star that he had heard about the application. It is unacceptable, for a private person cannot bring allegation against an HC judge.
But a legal expert requesting anonymity said anybody could appeal to the president to send allegations against an HC judge to the Supreme Judicial Council for investigation as per Article 96 of the constitution.
Receiving the allegations, the council may hear arguments from the complainants and the accused as part of the enquiry and then send a report with recommendations to the president, he said.