Case Law On High Profile Money Laundering Cases In Bangladesh
Case 1: Gias Uddin Al Mamun and Tarique Rahman Money Laundering Case
Facts:
Gias Uddin Al Mamun, a businessman, and Tarique Rahman, Acting Chairman of the Bangladesh Nationalist Party, were accused of laundering approximately Tk 20.41 crore to Singapore between 2003 and 2007.
The Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) filed the case alleging that the funds were illicitly transferred abroad.
Method of Money Laundering:
Illegally transferring large sums of money to foreign accounts.
Use of business networks to obscure the origin of funds.
Legal Proceedings:
ACC filed charges in 2009.
In 2013, the trial court sentenced Mamun to seven years imprisonment and imposed a fine, while acquitting Tarique.
Subsequent appeals led to the High Court overturning some sentences.
Finally, in 2025, the Supreme Court acquitted both Mamun and Tarique due to lack of sufficient evidence.
Significance:
Demonstrates the challenges in prosecuting high-profile political and business figures.
Highlights the need for strong evidence linking illicit funds to the accused.
Case 2: Former Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha Money Laundering Case
Facts:
Former Chief Justice Surendra Kumar Sinha was implicated in embezzlement and laundering of approximately Tk 4 crore from Farmers Bank Ltd.
The ACC filed the case under the Money Laundering Prevention Act (MLPA).
Method of Money Laundering:
Misappropriation of bank funds through fraudulent bank activities.
Attempted concealment of embezzled funds.
Legal Proceedings:
Trial court sentenced Sinha to 11 years imprisonment (4 years for embezzlement and 7 years for money laundering) and imposed fines.
This was one of the first cases where a former Chief Justice was convicted under MLPA.
Significance:
Sets a precedent for holding senior public office holders accountable for financial crimes.
Demonstrates that embezzlement and money laundering are often linked in Bangladesh.
Case 3: G.K. Shamim Money Laundering Case
Facts:
G.K. Shamim, a businessman and political figure, was accused of laundering large sums, including fixed deposits worth Tk 165 crore, cash, and foreign currency.
The ACC filed the case in 2019, and Shamim and his associates were initially convicted in 2023.
Method of Money Laundering:
Use of fixed deposit receipts and cash transactions to conceal illicit wealth.
Attempts to transfer funds across borders.
Legal Proceedings:
Sentenced to 10 years imprisonment in 2023 by a lower court.
Acquitted by the High Court in 2025 due to insufficient evidence linking him directly to the laundering activities.
Significance:
Highlights the challenges in linking high-value assets to criminal activity.
Shows the importance of forensic financial investigation and evidence tracing.
Case 4: Misbah Uddin and Associates Money Laundering Case (Sylhet)
Facts:
Misbah Uddin, a British citizen of Bangladeshi origin, and three others were accused of laundering funds through complex banking transactions.
The ACC filed the case under MLPA in 2016.
Method of Money Laundering:
Layering and transferring suspicious funds through multiple bank accounts.
Concealing sources of funds from authorities.
Legal Proceedings:
Sentenced in 2025: Misbah Uddin received 8 years, others 4 years each, along with fines totaling Tk 87.8 crore.
Significance:
Demonstrates how foreign citizens and cross-border transactions complicate money laundering investigations.
Shows the capacity of Bangladeshi courts to impose both imprisonment and financial penalties.
Case 5: Khulna Trader Money Laundering via Forged LCs
Facts:
S.M. Hafizur Rahman, a trader from Khulna, laundered US$119,000 through forged Letters of Credit (LCs) for non-existent imports.
The ACC filed the case in 2014 for transactions dating back to 2000.
Method of Money Laundering:
Trade-based laundering using forged import documents.
Diversion of funds intended for legitimate imports.
Legal Proceedings:
Charges framed in 2017.
In 2025, sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment under MLPA.
Significance:
Illustrates the use of trade-based mechanisms for laundering.
Shows that even cases involving older financial crimes can be prosecuted successfully if evidence is documented.
Key Observations Across These Cases
Legal Framework: The Money Laundering Prevention Act, 2012 (MLPA) is the primary law used.
Methods of Laundering: Cross-border transfers, fixed deposits, trade-based mechanisms, and layering through bank accounts.
Targets: Both high-profile political figures and businesspersons are prosecuted.
Legal Outcomes: Long durations from investigation to final verdicts; appellate courts can overturn convictions due to insufficient evidence.
Penalties: Typically involve both imprisonment and financial fines or asset confiscation.
RELATED Blog
comments