Why Do Bangladeshi Killers Keep Finding Safe Haven in India?

Jahid Ikbal : Whenever a high-profile murder, political assassination, or politically motivated killing takes place in Bangladesh, one question inevitably follows: Where did the perpetrators flee? Too often, the answer appears disturbingly familiar—across the border to India. This recurring pattern raises an uncomfortable but unavoidable question: Is this mere coincidence, or a deeply troubling regional reality?

Over the past two decades, numerous individuals accused in serious criminal cases—including murder and political violence—have reportedly escaped justice by crossing into India. Many of them, critics allege, have lived there for years without facing extradition. The message such incidents send is deeply corrosive: commit grave crimes in Bangladesh, cross the border, and remain beyond the reach of justice.

This concern has intensified amid widespread allegations that thousands of leaders and activists affiliated with the Awami League—including former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina—have taken refuge in India following political upheavals and the filing of criminal cases at home. While these claims remain politically contested, the public perception is undeniable. To many citizens, it increasingly appears that political influence determines who faces justice—and who escapes it.

The issue has gained renewed urgency following the tragic death of July fighter Sharif Osman Hadi, who passed away today in Singapore. Hadi was a symbol of resistance and political struggle for many. His killing shocked the nation, and allegations soon emerged that those responsible fled the country. According to public claims by activists, family members, and sections of the media, suspects linked to Hadi’s killing are believed to have taken shelter in India shortly after the crime. If these allegations are substantiated, it would represent yet another devastating example of alleged killers evading accountability.

All of this unfolds despite the existence of an extradition treaty between Bangladesh and India. On paper, the agreement signifies cooperation and shared commitment to the rule of law. In practice, repeated references to “legal complications,” “procedural delays,” and “diplomatic sensitivities” have rendered justice elusive. When alleged murderers remain free across the border, the credibility of such agreements is inevitably called into question.

This situation undermines Bangladesh’s justice system and places India in an increasingly uncomfortable moral and diplomatic position. Harboring fugitives—whether intentionally or through prolonged inaction—runs contrary to the principles of good-neighborly relations. When political affiliations or strategic considerations appear to shield accused criminals, justice itself becomes the casualty.

The most devastating consequence is the normalization of impunity. When perpetrators believe that crossing an international border guarantees safety, the rule of law collapses. Victims’ families are left to grieve without closure, society grows cynical, and violence is quietly encouraged.

Bangladesh must adopt a firmer, more transparent diplomatic stance. Friendship and regional cooperation cannot come at the cost of justice. At the same time, India must state clearly whether it stands as a partner in upholding the rule of law—or risks being perceived as a sanctuary for fugitives.

Bilateral relations must be built on accountability and justice, not silence and denial. Justice recognizes no borders—and neither should safe havens for alleged killers

Author Bio :
Jahid Ikbal is a senior journalist and social activist, known for his work on crime, justice, and civic accountability.