A formal grievance has been submitted to the administrative authorities at the University of Chittagong (CU) concerning allegations of prolonged online harassment, defamation, and the unauthorised distribution of manipulated imagery. The individual named in the complaint is Mohammad Shamim Uddin, who holds the position of Joint General Secretary within the university’s wing of the Jatiyatabadi Chhatra Dal (JCD).
The complainant, an undergraduate student in the Department of Zoology (session 2021-22), filed her written deposition with the University Proctor’s office on Sunday, 3 May 2026. The submission details a systematic pattern of cyber-harassment, allegedly perpetrated through pseudonymous social media accounts to circulate offensive content.
Specifics of the Administrative Complaint
In her statement to the Proctor, the victim alleged that Shamim Uddin—a senior student in her own department—has targeted her with various forms of intimidation over several years. She asserted that the accused has frequently posted obscene and derogatory remarks regarding her character on several digital platforms. Furthermore, the complaint highlights attempts to distort her personal photographs and distribute them across the internet to compromise her social standing.
The student noted that the situation escalated significantly in the days leading up to the complaint. Despite previous efforts to address the issue, she reported receiving a fresh wave of threatening and vulgar messages via her Facebook inbox from a “fake” account on 2 May 2026. Based on the specific nature of the threats and previous history, the student informed the authorities of her conviction that Shamim Uddin is the individual operating the anonymous profile.
The document underscores the emotional and psychological toll of the ordeal, stating:
“These persistent actions represent a direct threat to my personal safety and mental equilibrium. My family remains in a state of constant anxiety regarding the continuation of this harassment.”
History of Legal Recourse and Failed Deterrence
The current administrative move follows a prior attempt to involve law enforcement. The complainant revealed that she had previously registered a General Diary (GD) at the Hathazari Police Station. However, she claimed that the intervention of the police did not deter the perpetrator; rather, it allegedly prompted the creation of even more fraudulent digital identities to circumvent detection and continue the intimidation.
The involvement of the police underscores the gravity of the matter, as digital harassment in Bangladesh is subject to stringent legal oversight under the Cyber Security Act. This legislation is designed specifically to address grievances related to online defamation, the non-consensual sharing of intimate or distorted media, and digital stalking.
Institutional Inquiry and the Defendant’s Rebuttal
The University of Chittagong administration has formally acknowledged the complaint. Dr Md. Kamrul Hossain, an Assistant Proctor, confirmed that the office has initiated a preliminary inquiry. He stated that the university intends to uphold the principles of natural justice by summoning the accused to provide his testimony before determining the next course of disciplinary action.
In response to the public emergence of these allegations, Mohammad Shamim Uddin has issued a comprehensive denial of all charges. Addressing members of the press, he characterised the complaint as a politically motivated fabrication. He stated:
“I maintain a total lack of involvement in these purported activities. There is no tangible evidence linking me to these claims. This allegation has been orchestrated with the sole intent of damaging my reputation and political standing.”
The case has ignited significant discussion within the university community, highlighting urgent concerns regarding the safety of female students in digital spaces and the conduct of those in student leadership roles. As the Proctor’s office sifts through the provided digital evidence, the university’s disciplinary committee will eventually decide if the evidence warrants penalties, which, under institutional bylaws, can range from a formal reprimand to permanent expulsion.