Dhaka warnts for the arrest of Sheikh Hasina’s niece UK MP Tulip Siddiq

London: The Dhaka court on Sunday issued an arrest warrant against the niece of former-PM Sheikh Hasina and UK Labor MP Tulip Siddiq allegedly to receive a 7,200-class plot during his tenure of his overthrow aunt in the office.
Jakir Hussain Galib, Senior Special Judge of Dhaka Metropolitan, issued a warrant based on the charge sheet filed by the Anti -Corruption Commission of Bangladesh (ACC), which demanded the announcement of Siddiq (42), who lives in London, as a fugitive. The court also issued arrest warrants for 52 others, including Hasina, Siddiq’s mother Rehana, her brother Redwan and sister Azmina.
The judge on 27 April determined the implementation of the arrest warrant or the time limit for the presence of the accused in the court.
ACC DG MD Akhtar Hussain said that the members of the Hasina family had secretly and illegally six-10-cut plots on the road in No. 203, which were in Sector 27 of Purbachal New Town on the outskirts of Purbachal New Town on the outskirts of Dhaka with the help of senior Rajuk officials, Bangladeshi Daily “The Business Standard”. Hasina and her family members allegedly captured plots in 2022.
Daily Mail said, “Arrest warrant Ms. Siddiq, a sitting labor MP, wanted an absconding suspect in a foreign criminal investigation.
There is currently no extradition treaty between the UK and Bangladesh.
Siddiq resigned from her role as Britain’s anti -corruption minister in January, as it was revealed that she was investigating by the ACC.
The court also issued an arrest warrant against Hasina and her daughter Saiima included other plots in Purbachal New City last Thursday.
A spokesman for the Conservative Party commented, “He should immediately stand as a Labor MP.”
Siddiq’s lawyers issued a statement, stating, “Ms. Siddiq knows anything about the hearing in the Dhaka related to her and she has no knowledge of any arrest warrant, which has been issued. To be clear that there is no basis for any allegations to be made against her, and not at all in any charge that she has received a landlord in any charge.”