Rangpur quadruple murder: ASK finds inconsistencies in police account

The Ain o Salish Kendra (ASK), a Bangladeshi human rights organisation, has identified inconsistencies in the police account of the high-profile quadruple murder in Rangpur city.

In its preliminary observations, ASK has raised questions over the reported timing of the killings, changes in the police account, a suspicious phone call made from the mobile phone of victim Pritilata Chakraborty at 2.40am, and whether forensic evidence links the accused to the crime scene.

A two-member ASK delegation visited Rangpur on 24 and 25 August to investigate the case on the ground. The team spoke with relatives of the victims, neighbours, family members of the accused, police and Detective Branch officers, as well as people connected with the morgue and hospital and local journalists.

ASK released its preliminary observations on Thursday.

Mystery surrounding 2.40am phone call

One of the key issues highlighted by ASK is a phone call made from the mobile number of victim Pritilata Chakraborty at 2.40am.

Puja Chakraborty, Pritilata’s sister, told ASK that she last spoke to Pritilata at about 11.30pm on 20 August.

However, when Puja checked her phone the following day, she found that a call had been made to her from Pritilata’s number at 2.40am. She did not answer the call.

According to Puja, Pritilata would not normally make phone calls at such a late hour, making the call unusual in her view.

ASK says it is important to establish whether the 2.40am call is connected to the timing of the killings described by police.

Investigators need to determine who made the call, how long it lasted, where the mobile phone was located at the time and when the phones belonging to the other family members were switched off.

The organisation says these questions should be examined through call detail records, mobile phone location data, digital forensic analysis and other technological evidence.

Police account changed after the killings

ASK has also pointed to changes in the police explanation of what happened.

Police initially said Siddhartha Das and Mugdha Das had gone to the roof of Ganapati Chakraborty’s house to take yaba. When Ganapati objected, an argument allegedly broke out and he was killed.

Police then said the other members of the family were killed one by one by strangulation. Investigators also said household items were scattered after the killings in an apparent attempt to make the incident look like a robbery.

Rangpur Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mohammad Abdul Mabud told the ASK delegation that the two arrested men had gone to the roof to take yaba.

According to the police account, the two men remained inside the house for some time after the killings, ate food and left once they believed the situation was safe.

Police have also claimed that the suspects were identified through investigative leads and physical evidence, and that both later made confessional statements before a court.

However, police gave a different account at a press conference on 23 August.

At the time, police said Ganapati Chakraborty was killed on the roof in the early hours of the morning, while his wife and daughter were killed near the staircase leading to the roof. The 12-year-old child was reportedly killed while asleep.

Police initially said the two young men carried out the killings after becoming angry when Ganapati objected to their taking yaba on the roof.

The explanation changed at a later press conference on Thursday.

Outgoing Rangpur Metropolitan Police Commissioner Mohammad Abdul Mabud said that, alongside the dispute over yaba use, a possible land-related grievance involving Siddhartha Das and the Chakraborty family was also being investigated as a possible motive.

Where did the land dispute allegation come from?

According to the police’s latest account, the issue of a land dispute emerged from Siddhartha’s statement before the court.

Police said the Chakraborty family had bought land belonging to Siddhartha’s ancestors. Although the land was reportedly purchased at a comparatively higher price, police are investigating an allegation that some members of Siddhartha’s family did not receive their share of the money.

This means police are now examining at least two possible motives: anger over being prevented from taking yaba on the roof and a possible dispute or grievance over land.

ASK says it is necessary to independently establish which, if either, of these explanations is supported by evidence, or whether more than one factor may have been involved.

Confession must be tested against physical evidence

ASK says every significant part of the police account should be independently verified through physical and forensic evidence.

If the accused really remained inside the house after the killings, ate food and later left, investigators should determine whether forensic evidence connected with their presence can be found.

The organisation says investigators should clarify whether DNA, fingerprints, skin cells, hair and other biological material were collected from different parts of the house, including the bathroom, water sources, food containers, doors, windows and furniture.

A confession or police account alone cannot establish the entire sequence of events, ASK said. Information contained in a confession should be tested against physical evidence recovered from the crime scene.

Different accounts from relatives and families of the accused

The ASK delegation also spoke with family members of the accused.

Siddhartha Das’s father, Binoy Das, questioned his son’s arrest and called for a proper and impartial investigation.

Mugdha Das’s mother, Sena Rani Das, also said she was not certain whether her son was involved in the killings.

The parents of another suspect, Simanta Chandra Das, said their son was at home on the night of the incident. They said Siddhartha had visited their house for some time but did not stay there overnight.

ASK says these claims should be checked against other evidence and information collected during the investigation.

What Puja saw when she went to the house

According to ASK, shortly after 8pm on 22 August, Puja Chakraborty called her sister’s mobile phone and found it switched off.

Unable to contact the other family members either, she went to the house with her husband at about 9.15pm.

After police were informed, police and Fire Service personnel went to the house and broke down the door to recover the four bodies.

According to Puja’s account, Ganapati Chakraborty’s body was found on the roof. The bodies of Pritilata Chakraborty and Agami Chakraborty were found near the staircase, while Ayush Chakraborty’s body was found in a corner of a room.

Various household items were also found scattered around the house.

ASK says the circumstances raise questions about when and how the crime scene was secured and how evidence was collected and preserved.

Morgue worker’s observations are not conclusive

The ASK delegation also spoke with Sahab Ali, the officer in charge of the Rangpur morgue, and morgue worker Jatan Kumar.

Jatan Kumar said the bodies were in a decomposed condition. He did not notice injuries caused by sharp weapons, although he said some parts of the bodies appeared to have marks that could have been injuries.

He also said he did not notice signs of sexual assault on the two female victims.

ASK, however, stressed that observations made by morgue workers cannot be treated as final medical findings.

The organisation said the formal findings from post-mortem examinations, chemical tests and other forensic examinations should be regarded as the reliable basis for determining the cause and circumstances of death.

The 2.40am call remains a key question

One of the most important questions in the investigation is now who made the 2.40am call from Pritilata Chakraborty’s mobile phone.

If the call occurred before or after the time of the killings described by police, investigators need to establish its relevance to the sequence of events.

It may also be possible to determine where the mobile phone was located at the time, whether any other activity took place on the device and who may have been using it.

ASK has therefore called for a coordinated analysis of call records, mobile phone location data, CCTV footage, digital evidence, DNA, fingerprints and other physical evidence.

The organisation says the full picture of the investigation cannot be established without independently verifying the changes in the police account, questions surrounding the timing of the killings and the unexplained 2.40am phone call.

Detective Branch Deputy Commissioner Sanatan Chakraborty told the ASK delegation that different aspects of the case and the available evidence were being examined.

The investigation therefore faces a central question: how closely do the police account, the statements attributed to the accused, witness accounts and the physical and forensic evidence from the scene correspond with one another?

The answer to that question will be crucial in determining the credibility and impartiality of the investigation into the Rangpur quadruple murder.