Advertisement

Man, wife indicted for Ramisa murder

Man, wife indicted for Ramisa murder
Ramisa murder prime accused Sohel Rana (left) and his wife Swapna. Photo Collage: TIMES
Advertisement
Advertisement

Thirteen days after the brutal rape and murder of eight-year-old Ramisa in the capital’s Pallabi, the trial has officially commenced, revealing a new name—“Dollar”—that had not emerged during the initial stages of the case.

On Monday, a Dhaka court accepted the charge sheet, which had been submitted within just five days of the investigation, and ordered the start of the trial against the two accused, Sohel Rana and his wife Swapna Akter.

Witness testimony in the case is scheduled to begin on Tuesday.

Judge Masrur Salekin of the Dhaka Metropolitan Child Repression Prevention Tribunal passed the order, according to Public Prosecutor Omar Faruq Faruqi.

Under heavy police security, the prime accused, Sohel Rana, was brought out of the lock-up at 10:49am, followed by his wife, Swapna Akter, at 11:06am to face the proceedings.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The hearing began at 11:10am upon the judge’s arrival at the bench. During the session, the state lawyer informed the court that, according to the chargesheet, Sohel had murdered the child in a gruesome manner.

The prosecution alleged that the victim was first subjected to rape, after which the accused used sharp weapons to mutilate her body in an attempt to destroy any evidence of the crime.

To further ensure the evidence was obliterated, the child’s body was dismembered into several pieces after the murder. The state further contended that Sohel’s wife, Swapna, had actively assisted him in both the rape and the killing.

Related News

‘I did not kill her, I did not rape her’

When the judge questioned Sohel regarding these grave allegations, he denied them, stating, “I did not kill her. I did not rape her. My wife is also innocent.”

Instead, he pointed the finger at a man named “Dollar,” claiming, “Dollar committed the rape, and Dollar killed her. I am innocent. My DNA was not taken.”

While Sohel did not provide an exhaustive identity for this individual, he described him as a very wealthy man who had allegedly given him Tk2 lakh.

In a startling admission, Sohel told the court, “I am not that much of a criminal. I only cut the child into two pieces. But it was Dollar who raped her and Dollar who killed her.”

However, the state-appointed defense lawyer, Musa Kalimullah, noted a discrepancy, stating that the accused had never mentioned this “Dollar” during their prior consultations. He maintained his clients’ innocence, highlighting that the DNA report failed to identify the presence of the accused’s semen.

Following the hearing, Public Prosecutor Azizur Rahman Dulu informed journalists that he would fulfill his responsibility to ensure the case is concluded swiftly, noting that both the prime minister and home minister have given assurances of a speedy trial.

The court has since ordered the case to be transferred to the Dhaka Metropolitan Child Repression Prevention Tribunal for the remainder of the trial.

The investigation stems from the recovery of the child’s body on the afternoon of 19 May from a flat in Block B, Section 11 of Pallabi. Police reports indicate that Sohel Rana, 32, a sublet tenant at the residence, decapitated the child after cutting her throat and subsequently fled the scene by cutting through a window grill.

While Sohel escaped to Fatullah, Narayanganj – where he was arrested later that evening – his wife Swapna Akter remained in the flat and was detained by police. The victim’s father filed the case that same day, and police noted that Sohel had previously rendered a confessional statement under Section 164.

SI Ohiduzzaman of Pallabi Police Station, the investigating officer who submitted chargesheet on 24 May, addressed the accused’s claims regarding “Dollar.” He said the police had immediately verified the information but found no evidence of a third party’s involvement.

Detailed analysis of the individual’s mobile phone records, location data, and activities at the time of the crime showed no connection to the incident.

Ohiduzzaman concluded that the mention of “Dollar” appeared to be a motivated attempt to divert the investigation or perhaps a reflection of personal enmity. A total of 18 witnesses have been lined up to testify as the trial moves forward.

Follow TIMES on Google News

Get trusted updates and editor-picked stories in your feed.

Follow
Related News