Dr Yunus calls for charge to be dismissed

Nobel laureate in economics Dr Muhammad Yunus has filed a petition in the High Court seeking to quash the charge sheet order in a money laundering case filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC).

Abdullah Al Mamun, Dr Muhammad Yunus’ lawyer, filed the request on Monday (July 8).

The High Court bench comprising Justice Md Nazrul Islam Talukder and Justice Kazi Ibadat Hossain will hold a hearing on the matter.

Earlier on June 12, the court framed charges against Nobel laureate Dr Muhammad Yunus and 13 others in a case of embezzlement of around Tk 250 million from dividends earmarked for Grameen Telecom employees.

On April 2, Dhaka City Municipality Senior Special Judge Ash-Shams Joglul Hossain accepted the Anti-Corruption Commission’s (ACC) charge sheet against Dr Yunus and 13 others in the corruption case.

Later, an order was issued for the case to be transferred to Special Court No. 4 for trial.

On February 1, the investigating officer in the case, ACC Deputy Director Gulshan Anwar Pradhan, filed the chargesheet against the 14 individuals in court.

In May last year, Gulshan Anwar filed a complaint with the integrated district office of the anti-corruption body in Dhaka.

Besides Dr Yunus, the other accused in the case are Grameen Telecom Managing Director Nazmul Islam, its directors Ashraful Hasan, Naznin Sultana, Parvin Mahmud, Md Shahjahan, Nurjahan Begum and SM Huzzatul Islam Latifee, Sramik-Karmachari Union President Md Kamruzzaman, General Secretary Firoz Mahmud Hasan, Representative Md Mainul Islam, Jatiya Sramik Federation Office Secretary Kamrul Hasan and lawyers Zafrul Hasan Sharif and Yusuf Ali.

According to the statement, a decision was taken at the 108th board meeting of the company, chaired by Dr Yunus, on May 9, 2022, to open a bank account with the Gulshan branch of Dhaka Bank. However, it was found that the account had already been opened a day before the meeting.

More than Tk 260 million was transferred to the account on different occasions as per ‘fake settlement agreements’ and the board’s decision.

However, before distributing the company’s profit share to the workers and informing them, the accused, in collusion with each other, misappropriated around Tk 250 million from the fund.