Grameenphone Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Yasir Azman and two other top officials have secured bail in a case filed over allegations of fraud and breach of trust. On Sunday, the trio surrendered before the court of Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Rounak Jahan Taki through their lawyers and sought bail. After a hearing, the court granted them bail upon a bond of Tk 5,000 each.
The other two accused who received bail are Fazlul Haque, Acting Chairman of Grameenphone’s Trustee Board, and SayedaTahya Hossain, Chief Human Resources Officer.
Earlier, on September 26, former Grameenphone employee Rakibul Azam filed the case with the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate’s Court in Dhaka, accusing the three of fraud and breach of trust. The court recorded the complainant’s statement and summoned the accused to appear before the court on October 26.
Following the order, they surrendered before the court on Sunday morning. The hearing began around noon, with the accused standing in the dock as their lawyers argued for bail. Defence counsel Shomaji told the court that the case stemmed from a “disputed contract”, saying the accused “respect the law and the court”. There was another case in the labour court which was stayed by the High Court. Ld. Shomaji also placed his submission before the court that the allegations of fraud and theft are baseless. The alleged contract does not even specify any monetary amount. These are senior officials performing key duties. The case was filed simply to harass them.”
The plaintiff’s lawyer Rokeya Akter opposed the bail petitions, saying her client was owed more than Tk 800,000. “When he went to Grameenphone to collect his payment, they made him sign a Tk 300 stamp paper, saying they would issue a cheque later. But they did not pay him, and he has been seeking justice ever since,” she told the court. With permission from the magistrate, Rakibul himself spoke, insisting that “this case has no link with the labour court proceedings”, adding that Grameenphone had “lost there and later secured a six-month stay from the High Court”.
The case had been filed under sections 406, 420, 380, and 109 of the Penal Code against three senior officials of Grameenphone, alleging non-payment ofTk 828,998 from the Welfare Fund. The plaintiff claimed that the accused had failed to clear the dues. But the lawyers argued that the allegation was false, and that was why the court had earlier issued a summons. They added that the court had done justice by granting bail to the accused.
Opposing the bail plea today, the plaintiff's lawyer Rokeya Akter said that Grameenphone owes her client unpaid dues for the years 2010, 2011, and 2012. She stated that the plaintiff repeatedly visited Grameenphone to collect his dues, and the company had assured him of payment after signing an agreement. However, she alleged that the accused deceived him, exploiting his good faith and never paid the money.
"When the plaintiff later approached Fazlul Haque, acting chairman of Grameenphone's trustee board, he reportedly replied, 'Oh, they haven't paid you yet? I'll look into it'." But since then, she claimed, they have continued to delay and avoid payment.
According to the case statement, the plaintiff Rakibul Azam worked for Grameenphone Ltd from 2006 to 2021. During his employment, between 2010 and 2012, he was instructed to distribute funds held under outsourcing arrangements among employees. As a result, Grameenphone owed him Tk 828,998 for the outsourcing work.
On 10 November (year unspecified), the plaintiff was called to collect his payment. When he went to the office, the accused allegedly took his signature on a Tk300 non-judicial stamp paper and sent him away without paying the money. Afterwards, they continued to avoid repayment through various excuses.
According to the case statement, Rakibul worked at Grameenphone from 2006 to 2021. Between 2010 and 2012, he was involved in disbursing funds from an outsourcing project among employees. He claimed that the company still owed him Tk 829,998. When he went to collect the payment in November last year, the accused allegedly took his signature on a Tk 300 stamp paper and sent him away without payment. He alleged that the company then avoided repaying the amount despite repeated requests.
However, Grameenphone in a statement said, "This is a case motivated for harassment. This case has been filed with the intention of harassing our senior management. We have faith in the law. We believe that we will get justice in the honorable court."
PT/ra
