Faridpur district police have recommended departmental cases against 11 Detective Branch personnel over the death of Mirza Ishtiaq Ahmed, 27, while in DB custody.
Police Superintendent Shahriar Mohammad Miahji confirmed that the recommendation was made on the basis of an internal investigation and that the report was sent to Police Headquarters.
Those recommended for action include DB officer in charge Md Alamgir Hossain, two sub-inspectors, an assistant sub-inspector, six constables and a driver.
Ishtiaq was detained outside his home beside the Dhaka–Khulna highway in West Gondhardia, Madhukhali, on 20 June.
He became ill in custody the following morning, was taken to Faridpur Medical College Hospital and died while receiving treatment.
He was a Faridpur Law College student, worked seasonally at a local sugar mill and was known locally as a Chhatra League worker.
A narcotics case filed by DB sub-inspector Ahaduzzaman alleged that Ishtiaq was detained around 2am on 20 June and voluntarily handed over 100 grams of cannabis from his trouser pocket.
Video footage described in the inquiry showed a different sequence: the detention appeared to occur in daylight, Ishtiaq was wearing a lungi, and a DB member was seen striking his head during a search.
Two people named as witnesses in the narcotics case told the inquiry that they had been at Madhukhali market, at least 100 metres from the scene, and alleged that their signatures were later obtained through intimidation and false representations.
Ishtiaq’s mother, Khadija Akhter, alleged to the inquiry that DB personnel sought Tk65,000 for his release and later asked her to bring Tk100,000 to Faridpur.
A three-member committee led by Additional Superintendent of Police Fatema Islam was formed after the incident and submitted its findings to the police superintendent on 27 July.
Miahji said all personnel who took part in the operation under the officer in charge’s direction had some degree of involvement in wrongdoing.
The police superintendent did not provide detailed comment on the video, the discrepancies over time and clothing, the witness allegations or the alleged demand for money.