Dhaka, May 21 — Serious allegations of political interference and judicial manipulation have emerged after all accused, including Transcom Group Managing Director Simeen Rahman, were discharged from a high-profile fraud case despite a formal charge sheet being submitted by investigators.
Former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina and former interim government Law Adviser Asif Nazrul have been accused of intervening to secure favourable legal outcomes for Simeen Rahman in multiple cases, including allegations linked to the death of her brother and the alleged illegal takeover of family-owned company shares.
The controversy intensified after a court dismissed a case filed by Simeen’s younger sister, Transcom director Shazreh Huq, who accused her elder sister of forging documents and illegally transferring company shares and property into her own name. The case had already been investigated by the Police Bureau of Investigation (PBI), which submitted a charge sheet against six individuals.
Allegations of Political and Media Influence
Sources connected to the case allege that the course of the legal proceedings was altered through the influence of Asif Nazrul, who allegedly intervened in exchange for unethical benefits. Editors Matiur Rahman and Mahfuz Anam of Transcom-owned newspapers Prothom Alo and The Daily Star have also been accused of acting as intermediaries in the alleged efforts to secure favourable outcomes.
Plaintiff Shazreh Huq claimed that the case was dismissed without allowing her legal team to present arguments before the court.
“The court dismissed the case without even hearing our application. The case was dismissed due to interference by a third party. I am astonished by this,” Shazreh said.
She added that despite investigators submitting evidence-based findings, all accused were discharged without proper consideration of the complainant’s position. The matter has since been taken to the High Court through an appeal.
Family Power Struggle Turns Public
The dispute within the influential Transcom family became public following the death of founder chairman Latifur Rahman on July 1, 2020. By 2024, while the Awami League government remained in power, Shazreh Huq filed multiple cases against Simeen Rahman, accusing her of “murder, embezzlement, property grabbing and illegal transfer of shares.”
According to case documents, Simeen Rahman allegedly forged the signatures of her siblings to transfer controlling shares of Transcom Group companies into her own name. She is also accused of preparing a fake family deed of settlement and attempting to transfer 35 kathas of prime Gulshan land using forged documents.
Investigators further alleged that a 2020 board meeting approving the disputed share transfers included forged signatures of Shazreh Huq, her brother Arshad Waliur Rahman, and even deceased founder Latifur Rahman, despite none of them being present.
Lawyers and Court Influence Allegations
Legal sources alleged that during the final period of the Awami League government, Simeen Rahman relied on Advocate Towfika Karim — described as a close associate of former Law Minister Anisul Huq — to obtain favourable court orders. Two lawyers from Karim’s chamber allegedly handled proceedings at different judicial stages to secure rulings in Simeen’s favour.
Following the political transition after the 2024 mass uprising, Simeen allegedly sought assistance from Asif Nazrul, who is now accused of using his influence to intervene in the ongoing legal battles.
ACC Investigating Alleged Tk10 Billion Bribe
Separately, the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) has launched an investigation into allegations that Simeen Rahman paid Tk10 billion in bribes to former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina to suppress multiple criminal cases involving “murder, share forgery and fraud.”
An ACC deputy director was assigned to the inquiry in November last year, formally initiating the investigation.
A senior ACC official confirmed that investigators are examining the alleged roles of both individuals and institutions connected to the case.
Attempts to contact the accused parties for comment were unsuccessful.
