While delivering the appeal's verdict over the murder of blogger Ahmed Rajib Haider, the High Court yesterday came up with some observations about the roles the state, imams and parents should play so that youths cannot get involved in militancy.

Observing that parents should be more careful about keeping their children on the right path, the HC also noted that imams must not deliver any speech which goes against the laws of the land.

“An imam's duty is to conduct the prayers to religious Musullies [devotees] at a mosque and to give them the right guidance about Islam. He [imam] will not deliver any speech which is contrary to the laws of the land,” the court observed.

If anybody makes derogatory comments on Islam and Prophet Hazrat Muhammad (PBUH) or any other religion, he or she can be brought to book, it said, adding, “Nobody has the right to take the law in his own hand and nobody should make derogatory comments about any religion.”

Even if any person does not believe in any religion, he or she should not make any disparaging comments about religion, the HC said.

The court made the observations while delivering the verdict on the death reference and appeals of eight convicts in the 2013 Rajib murder case.

The HC upheld death penalty of two convicts, life imprisonment for one and various jail terms for five others. It observed that seven convicts in Rajib murder case “have gone to the dogs” due to their parents' failure to give them proper education.

Rajib, who was an activist of Shahbagh movement and used to write against Jamaat-Shibir and war criminals on different blogs under the pseudonym Thaba Baba, was hacked to death near his Mirpur home on February 15, 2013.

The condemned convicts are: Redwanul Azad Rana, and Faisal Bin Nayem alias Dweep.

Among the jailed convicts, Mufti Jasimuddin Rahmani, chief of banned militant outfit Ansarullah Bangla Team, was awarded five years' imprisonment as he was found guilty of provoking Rajib's murder with his sermons.

Maksudul Hasan alias Anik was given life term imprisonment. Four other convicts -- Ehsan Reza Rumman, Nafis Imtiaz, Nayem Sikdar Irad and Sadman Yasir Mahmud -- had been sentenced to different jail terms.

Apart from Jasimuddin, all the seven convicts were students of North South University in 2013.

The HC observed, based on evidence and arguments made before it, that the seven were meritorious students and their parents were well educated and in good positions.

“It is not apprehended why they [seven convicts] have gone to this wrong path. We [judges], like many others, think that their parents are responsible for it. Their [parents] duty was to give proper education to their children, but they failed to do that. Therefore, their children [convicts] have gone to the dogs,” said the HC bench of Justice Jahangir Hossain Selim and Justice Md Jahangir Hossain.

The judges said their parents were busy with their lives and failed to give proper attention to their children.

They said the parents had imposed a certain education and other things on their children without caring for what the children want to do or study. This made the children reactive. This practice of the parents should be stopped, the HC observed.

Parents are the primary teachers of their children and they have to carry out their responsibilities in this regard, it added.

At the same time, everyone, including the state, should ensure quality education and make people aware of the country's political atmosphere, population control, true history of the country's independence and religious harmony, the HC observed.

The inspector general of police should appoint honest, sincere and experienced officers, who are committed to working for the people, to investigate such cases, it said.

“Then such crimes would be reduced from the society and the country … ,” it said.

Citing the defence's arguments, the HC said three investigation officers probed the case. Jasimuddin used to deliver sermons against bloggers but the investigation officers failed to provide the evidence, the HC said.

“It was a planned murder. The offence committed by the accused was horrendous, heinous and atrocious. Therefore, we don't find any extraneous ground to commute the sentences and also don't find any reason to interfere with the conviction and sentences handed down by the trial court,” the HC bench said.

PARENTS DISAPPOINTED

Rajib's father Mohammad Nazim Uddin expressed disappointment over the High Court judgment and said he did not get justice.

“This is an influenced and split verdict,” he told journalists. “The government says it has a zero-tolerance policy against militancy, but I did not find its reflection ... .

Asked whether he would appeal against the verdict, he said he would decide after consulting his lawyers about moving an appeal for higher sentences of the convicts who were awarded different jail terms.

The HC yesterday rejected Nazim Uddin's petition for enhancing punishment of six jailed convicts.

The lawyer for condemned Rana told The Daily Star that Rana would file an appeal with the apex court.

The lawyer for Anik said he would move an appeal for Anik if his parents instructed him.

BACKGOUND

Rajib was a key organiser of Shahbagh movement that began on February 5, 2013, hours after Jamaat leader Abdul Quader Mollah was given life sentence for committing war crimes in 1971, a punishment that was deemed lenient.

He graduated in architecture from Asia Pacific University in 2004.

After the killing, online Jamaat-Shibir activists and some pro-Jamaat and BNP newspapers tried to justify the murder by branding him “an atheist”.

Rajib's father filed the case on February 16, 2013, and police pressed charges against the eight on January 25, 2014. The Fourth Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge's Court framed charges against the eight and the case was later transferred to the Speedy Trial Tribunal-3 of Dhaka.

The tribunal on December 31, 2015, handed down death penalty to Rana, 32, and Dweep, 24, and fined them Tk 10,000 each.

Anik, 25, who accompanied Rana and Dweep during the killing, was given life in prison. He was also fined Tk 10,000, in default of which he would have to serve one more year in jail.

Rumman, 25, Nafis, 24, and Nayem, 21, were each given 10 years of rigorous imprisonment. They were also fined Tk 5,000 each. If they fail to pay the money, they must serve six more months in jail.

The trial court also sentenced Sadman, 22, to three years in prison. His fine was Tk 2,000, in default of which he would have to serve two more months in jail.

It sentenced Mufti Jasimuddin, 45, to five years in prison and fined Tk 2,000. In default, he has to serve two more months in prison.

The convicts, now in custody, filed separate appeals and petitions with the HC challenging the trial court verdict.