The granting of bail to a student leader captured on video boasting about killing a police officer and torching a police station during the August 2024 unrest has reignited debate over accountability, political influence, and the erosion of the rule of law under Bangladesh’s interim government.
On Sunday, the Habiganj Senior Judicial Magistrate Court-3 granted bail to Mahdi Hasan, the Habiganj district unit member secretary of the platform Students Against Discrimination (SAD). Mahdi was released within roughly 14 hours of his arrest, despite widespread public outrage triggered by viral footage in which he appeared to claim responsibility for lethal violence against law-enforcement personnel during the July–August uprising last year.
Judicial Magistrate Abdul Mannan approved Mahdi’s release on a Tk 200 bond at around 10:30 a.m., Habiganj court inspector Aminul Islam told reporters at the court premises. Police said Mahdi had been arrested at about 8:30 p.m. the previous evening from a residence in Habiganj town.
Despite the contents of the viral video, law-enforcement officials confirmed that no case has been filed against Mahdi for the killing of Sub-Inspector Santosh Chowdhury or for the arson attack on the Baniachong Police Station, incidents that occurred during the violent phase of the 2024 movement. Instead, an FIR was lodged accusing him only of obstructing police in the discharge of government duties—an offense carrying largely bailable sections.
In the video, recorded during a confrontation inside Shayestaganj Police Station on Friday afternoon, Mahdi is heard addressing the officer-in-charge, Abdul Kalam, in an aggressive tone. “Through the July movement, we formed the government. You are officials of our administration,” he says in the footage. At another point, he adds, “We burned down Baniachong Police Station and set SI Santosh on fire. From that position, how dare you say, ‘So what if he is an SAD activist?’”
The video spread rapidly on social media, drawing widespread condemnation from civil society figures, former law-enforcement officials, and legal experts, many of whom questioned how such statements could be publicly made without triggering more serious criminal charges.
Mahdi’s arrest followed a standoff at Shayestaganj Police Station over the detention of Enamul Hasan Nayan, a former leader of the now-banned Bangladesh Chhatra League. Police said Nayan had been picked up late Thursday night after his name appeared as vice-president in a 2023 local committee of the organization. SAD leaders, however, claimed Nayan had participated in the 2024 uprising and should therefore be treated as part of the movement.
On Friday, Mahdi and several SAD activists reportedly surrounded the police station and entered the office of the officer-in-charge, demanding Nayan’s release. The confrontation escalated into a heated argument, parts of which were later captured on video.
Following mediation by Additional Superintendent of Police (Habiganj Sadar Circle) Shahidul Islam, Nayan was released at around 3:30 p.m. that day.
Mahdi’s subsequent detention late Saturday sparked overnight protests. Police said at least 30 to 32 SAD leaders and activists gathered outside Shayestaganj Police Station and remained there throughout the night, pressing for his release. Army personnel were later deployed to maintain order, according to the station’s officer-in-charge.
In a Facebook post made around 12:30 a.m. on Sunday, SAD demanded Mahdi’s unconditional release and called for the removal of the officer-in-charge of Habiganj Sadar Police Station. The platform also issued a broader political demand, urging the President to promulgate an ordinance within 24 hours granting immunity to participants in the July–August uprising for actions carried out between July 1 and August 8, 2024.
Speaking to reporters later, Habiganj district convener of SAD Arif Talukder said, “We were informed by the central committee that the home adviser had spoken about releasing Mahdi.” He argued that incidents linked to the July uprising could not be subjected to legal action, claiming they fell under what he described as the “July Proclamation.”
Mahdi himself later acknowledged receiving a show-cause notice from his organization, saying his remarks in the video were a “slip of the tongue.” SAD subsequently issued a formal notice directing him to refrain from organizational activities until further notice, stating that his comments were inconsistent with the platform’s ideals and had damaged its public image.
Legal analysts say the episode underscores a deeper crisis. “The interim government, installed after the fall of the Sheikh Hasina-led administration in August 2024, has repeatedly pledged to uphold the rule of law and ensure impartial justice,” Advocate Parvez Hashem, a human rights defender, told The Voice. Yet he argues that “the handling of cases linked to the uprising—particularly those involving attacks on police stations, arson, and killings—suggests a pattern of selective enforcement.”
Legal experts say the absence of clear prosecutorial action in cases involving attacks on police during the uprising risks setting a precedent that undermines deterrence and equal application of the law.
Former law-enforcement officials note that while hundreds of individuals associated with the previous ruling party have faced swift arrests under sweeping charges, cases involving violence during the uprising itself have seen little progress. The contrast has fueled accusations that political alignment, rather than evidence, is shaping prosecutorial decisions.
As Mahdi emerged from the court on Sunday, local residents said he was escorted in a celebratory procession by SAD supporters through several streets of Habiganj town, a scene that further intensified public concern over the message being sent to victims’ families and rank-and-file police officers.
For many observers, the case has become emblematic of a broader question confronting Bangladesh at a critical juncture: whether the state can move forward without confronting violence committed in the name of political change, and whether justice can remain credible when accountability appears uneven.
