The trial has begun in a case filed by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) against contractor Golam Kibria Shamim, widely known as G K Shamim, over alleged fraud, the use of forged documents and concealment of a company’s legal identity in connection with a Tk 750 million project to construct the Sixth Academic Building (Second Faculty of Arts and Humanities) at the University of Chittagong (CU).
On August 30, Judge Md. Mizanur Rahman of the Chattogram Divisional Special Judge’s Court framed charges against Shamim, formally initiating the trial. September 20 has been fixed for the first hearing to record witness testimony. Shamim, who is on bail in the case, has pleaded not guilty and sought legal relief.
According to the case documents and the ACC’s investigation report, the University of Chittagong invited tenders on August 28, 2016, for the second phase of construction of the academic building at an estimated cost of Tk 750,001,295. G K Shamim’s company, GKB & Company (Pvt.) Limited, participated in the tender as the lead firm, with The Builders Engineers Associates Limited as its joint-venture partner. An agreement for the project was subsequently signed with the university authorities on November 14 of the same year.
The ACC alleged that GKB & Company (Pvt.) Limited was registered on August 29, 2016, just one day after the tender was invited. This raised questions about the company’s own experience and eligibility to participate in the bidding process. Investigators alleged that the work experience accumulated over 10 years, five years of annual turnover records and financial-capacity information belonging to Shamim’s previously operated sole proprietorship, M/S G K Builders, were used to establish the new company’s eligibility.
The investigation report further alleged irregularities in the disclosure of the company’s legal identity and registration details. It also accused the company of inflating its authorised share capital to influence the tender evaluation committee. According to the case documents, only two contractors were able to participate in the tender. Allegations also emerged that other contractors had been obstructed from collecting tender documents. The incident reportedly triggered clashes between two factions of the Bangladesh Chhatra League on the university campus at the time.
Following Shamim’s arrest in 2019 during the nationwide anti-casino crackdown, when law enforcement agencies reportedly recovered a substantial amount of money, firearms and drugs from his residence in Dhaka’s Niketan area, scrutiny of his contracting activities intensified. The ACC subsequently investigated allegations concerning the tender process for the University of Chittagong project.
According to the case records, the ACC filed the case on November 22, 2020, following an investigation into alleged irregularities in the tender process. After completing its investigation, the commission submitted the charge sheet to the court on May 17, 2025.
Fazlul Karim Chowdhury, managing director of The Builders Engineers Associates Limited, was initially named as an accused in the case. However, investigators recommended his discharge after reportedly finding insufficient evidence against him. Consequently, G K Shamim remains the sole accused in the charge sheet.
The ACC case invokes several provisions of the Penal Code, including Section 420 for cheating, Section 467 for forgery of valuable securities and other specified documents, Section 468 for forgery intended for the purpose of cheating, Section 471 for using forged documents as genuine, and Section 409 for criminal breach of trust by specified categories of persons.
With the court framing charges, the case has formally entered the trial stage. The prosecution is expected to present its evidence and witnesses when testimony begins on September 20.
Transparency in public procurement and proper verification of contractors’ qualifications are essential to ensuring accountability in publicly funded development projects. Allegations of irregularities involving a major infrastructure project at a public university warrant thorough investigation and judicial scrutiny.
However, the allegations against G K Shamim have yet to be established through the trial. He cannot legally be considered guilty unless the charges are proven in court. The final outcome will depend on the evidence presented and the court’s judgment.