The verdict was delivered on Thursday, 29 October, by International Crimes Tribunal-2.
The three other defendants are Sadar Uddin Khan, former chairman of the Kushtia District Council; Asgar Ali, general secretary of the Kushtia district unit of the Awami League; and Ataur Rahman, general secretary of the Kushtia municipal unit of the party. All three received life imprisonment.
According to the case details, Hanif and the other defendants faced three charges, including the killing of six people in Kushtia town. The allegations formed the basis of the proceedings before the tribunal, which considered evidence presented during the trial before delivering its judgement.
All four defendants remain absconding. The tribunal nevertheless completed the judicial proceedings and announced its verdict. No further details were immediately available regarding the circumstances of their absence, the possibility of their arrest or the next steps towards implementing the sentences.
The case formally moved to trial after charges were framed against the defendants on 2 November 2025. During the proceedings, a total of 18 witnesses gave evidence. The prosecution and defence subsequently presented their arguments, with the final stage of legal submissions completed over two rounds before the tribunal delivered its decision.
The sentences mark a significant development in the proceedings against the four political figures. Hanif’s death sentence is the most severe punishment imposed in the case, while the three life sentences carry substantial legal consequences for the other defendants. The order to confiscate half of their assets adds a further dimension to the judgement.
The case centres on allegations of serious offences committed in Kushtia, including the deaths of six people. However, the full reasoning behind the tribunal’s findings and its detailed assessment of the individual charges were not provided in the available report.
The immediate implications of the verdict will depend partly on the subsequent legal process and the authorities’ efforts to locate the absconding defendants. Further information would be needed to establish whether any appeals or other legal steps are pursued.
The judgement brings the trial proceedings to a significant stage, although questions surrounding the defendants’ whereabouts and the implementation of the sentences remain unresolved.
