A court in Manikganj has sentenced Solaiman Hossain, 34, to 10 years’ rigorous imprisonment for the killing of his sister-in-law Parvin and her young son in Saturia, in a case dating back to January 2020.
Manikganj District and Sessions Judge SKM Tofayel Hasan delivered the verdict at around 4pm on Tuesday (6 October), following a lengthy judicial process involving witness testimony and other evidence.
According to the case statement, the double killing took place in North Kaunnara village of Saturia upazila in January 2020. The prosecution alleged that Solaiman had developed an illicit relationship with his sister-in-law, Parvin. At one stage, she reportedly pressured him to marry her, leading to a serious dispute between the two.
The case statement alleges that Solaiman subsequently stabbed Parvin to death. Her young son, Abdun Noor, who was reportedly present and witnessed the killing, was then attacked and killed with a sharp weapon, according to the allegations.
Police arrested Solaiman following the incident. He was later produced before a court, where he reportedly made a confessional statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, admitting responsibility for the killings.
The case then proceeded through the judicial system, with evidence and witness statements presented during the trial. After the proceedings were completed, the court handed down the 10-year prison sentence on Tuesday.
The verdict has drawn criticism from both sides, though for very different reasons.
Government prosecutor AFM Nurtaj Alam Bahar expressed dissatisfaction with the sentence, arguing that 10 years’ imprisonment was inadequate for a double murder case of such sensitivity. He said the complainant’s side was not satisfied with the verdict and would seek a stronger sentence through an appeal to the higher court.
The defence took the opposite position and said the investigation contained serious shortcomings and inconsistencies. Defence lawyer Mahbubul Islam questioned the handling of key physical evidence, particularly the knife allegedly used in the killings.
According to the defence lawyer, the knife was not properly presented before the court after forensic examination. He argued that the deficiencies in the investigation meant that justice had not been properly served and said the defence would appeal against the conviction, seeking Solaiman’s acquittal.
The case therefore remains open to further legal proceedings, with both the prosecution and defence indicating plans to approach the higher court.
The verdict comes nearly six years after the deaths of Parvin and her son. While the court has now delivered its decision at the trial stage, the opposing positions of the two sides mean that the case could continue through the appellate process. The prosecution is seeking a heavier punishment, while the defence is challenging the conviction itself and raising questions about the investigation and handling of evidence.
