Meghna Alam: Accuser unknown, but police file the case

TIMES Report
5 Min Read
Model Meghna Alam was produced before the Dhaka CMM Court, Dhaka, April 17 April in a case filed over extortion. Photo: FocusBangla.

Model Meghna Alam was formally shown arrested on Thursday (17 April) by the Dhaka CMM Court in connection with an extortion case filed with Dhanmondi Police Station. Although the case’s official plaintiff is the police, the allegations originated from anonymous sources.

According to police claims, several “wealthy individuals” accused Meghna of extortion, but none of them agreed to file a case or even a general diary (GD). In this rare instance, the police themselves stepped in, with an officer filing the case on behalf of the unnamed individuals.

A senior official of Dhaka Metropolitan Police (DMP) told Times of Bangladesh, “Meghna was seen multiple times at a restaurant in Dhanmondi meeting with affluent people. Later, some of them informed us about a fraud attempt. Based on that, police filed the case.”

He insisted that the police possess all the necessary evidence but declined to reveal the identities of the complainants or explain why police took the initiative to file the case themselves.

According to official sources, Inspector (Investigation) Mohammad Abdul Alim of Dhanmondi Police Station on 15 April filed the case against Meghna, Dewan Samir, and two or three unidentified individuals, alleging extortion and fraud.

The case alleges that Meghna, Samir, and others demanded $5 million (approx. Tk 60 crore) from an unnamed diplomat during a secret meeting held at a Dhanmondi restaurant on 29 March. The goal of the meeting, according to the complaint, was to extort money through deception—raising concerns that such activities could damage Bangladesh’s international relations.

Model Meghna Alam was produced before the Dhaka CMM Court, Dhaka, April 17 April in a case filed over extortion. Photo: FocusBangla.

On Thursday, Meghna was presented in a Dhaka court.

Dhaka’s Chief Metropolitan Court Public Prosecutor Omar Faruk Faruki told reporters, “With the court’s permission, Meghna spoke and claimed she had a personal acquaintance with Saudi Ambassador Isa Yusuf Isa Alduhailan. She also claimed that the ambassador had called her.”

Faruki added that Meghna denied knowing Dewan Samir.

The court granted the police request to officially show Meghna as arrested in this case, while Samir was remanded for five days for interrogation.

Previously, on 11 April, Samir had been arrested in a separate extortion case filed with Vatara Police Station and remains in custody under remand.

Meghna was detained on 10 April night, by DB police from her residence in Dhaka’s Bashundhara area. The following day, the Home Ministry issued a 30-day detention order under the Special Powers Act. The lack of clarity around her detention sparked nationwide controversy.

DB Police later stated that Meghna was suspected of endangering state security, spreading false information to damage diplomatic relations, and conspiring to undermine the national economy.

However, on Sunday (13 April), Law Adviser Asif Nazrul stated in a press briefing that Meghna’s arrest procedure had been flawed.

Model Meghna
Model and actress Meghna Alam, crowned ‘Miss Earth Bangladesh’. Photo: Collected.

That same day, DB chief Rezaul Karim Mallik was removed from his post amid heavy criticism, and reassigned to DMP Headquarters.

Also on Sunday, Meghna’s father Badrul Alam filed a writ petition with the High Court, which took it into cognizance. The court issued notice asking that why Meghna had been detained without a warrant, kept in custody for over 24 hours, denied legal counsel, and asked whether the detention under the Special Powers Act will not be declared illegal.

However, Chief Adviser’s Special Assistant Md. Khoda Bakhsh Chowdhury on Tuesday (15 April) told reporters that actions against Meghna were being taken under regular laws and that “there was nothing unlawful” in her arrest—remarks that drew further public backlash.

When asked why the Law Adviser had earlier stated the process was “improper,” Chowdhury said he was unaware and that the adviser had not communicated with them about it.

Share This Article
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *