A Dhaka court has sentenced former Rajdhani Unnayan Kartripakkha (RAJUK) chairman Iqbal Uddin Chowdhury and seven others to 14 years in prison in a corruption case involving irregularities in plot allocations in the Purbachal residential project.
The court also fined each of the eight convicts Tk 1 million and ordered the cancellation of two plots allocated through the alleged irregularities.
Judge Abdus Salam of Dhaka’s Ninth Special Judge Court delivered the verdict on Tuesday.
The other convicts include former RAJUK members S D Faiz, Wahedul Islam, Zafar Ullah, Zahurul Haque and Rezaul Karim Torafdar. Plot recipients Shawkat Aziz and Ashfaq Aziz were also sentenced in the case.
According to the case allegations, the accused abused their official positions and acted in collusion to secure plot allocations by bypassing eligible applicants. The prosecution alleged that the allocation process involved deception and deliberate violations of the applicable procedures.
The allegations further stated that, despite the withdrawal of deposits and the cancellation of applications, the accused arranged for two individuals to receive two plots measuring a total of 10 kathas. The prosecution maintained that the allocation was made with the intention of securing undue benefits.
The court imposed sentences under two separate legal provisions. Alongside the prison terms and financial penalties, it ordered the cancellation of the two disputed plot allocations.
None of the accused was present in court when the verdict was announced. The court consequently issued arrest warrants against them.
Khondaker Shamim Hossain, a lawyer representing the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC), confirmed the verdict.
Purbachal is a major planned residential development intended to support urban expansion in and around Dhaka. Plot allocation in such projects is expected to follow established rules and transparent procedures to ensure that eligible applicants receive fair consideration.
The verdict marks a legal development in the case concerning the alleged misuse of authority in the allocation process. However, no immediate information was available on whether the convicts had appealed against the judgment.
