853)(Story_66) Minister Attack. _ Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman

 853)(Story_66) Minister Attack. _ Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman https://mywritingsjunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2019/12/about-me-junayed-ashrafur-rahman.html ✒ 

## Chapter One

### An Unrestful Morning in Nayashahar

Arunbesht, the capital of Nayashahar Province, was the busiest administrative district in the region. Government offices, courthouses, commercial buildings, and media headquarters lined both sides of its wide streets. At the center of the city stood the Provincial Secretariat. From the outside, the building appeared orderly, but its internal administrative system was far more complicated.

The political situation in the city had been tense for some time. News outlets were publishing a steady stream of reports alleging the embezzlement of funds from government development projects, irregularities in public-sector recruitment, and misuse of student organization funds. Although the government claimed these allegations were politically motivated, public dissatisfaction continued to grow.

Vrelian Chowdhury, the provincial minister of public welfare, had become a central figure in the controversy. Just a few years earlier, he had been a familiar face in student politics. During his university years, he had gained popularity by speaking out against corruption, campaigning for students’ rights, and exposing administrative misconduct.

His speeches repeatedly emphasized justice, transparency, and accountability. He often said, “No organization is more important than the people. No position places anyone above the law. Anyone who commits a wrongdoing must answer for it.”

Many young people had been inspired by those words during his student years. Among them was Aritra Debnath. While attending university, Aritra had entered politics after hearing Vrelian speak. He believed that one day they would establish a system in which no one could escape justice because of their connections or political power.

But over time, things began to change.

After Vrelian became a minister, a new circle of influence formed around him. His contact with former classmates and fellow activists gradually diminished. Government officials, political advisers, and representatives of contracting companies could reach him easily, while many of his former student activists had to wait for days just to secure a meeting.

At first, Aritra accepted this as a natural consequence of changing circumstances. He assumed that Vrelian’s government responsibilities had made him busier. But later, he learned about several incidents that weakened his faith in the minister.

Allegations emerged that some of the money allocated to renovate an old university dormitory had been diverted elsewhere through a contracting company. Although the dormitory remained unfinished, official records listed the project as complete. After students complained, an investigative committee was formed. Several months passed, however, without any findings being released.

Some of Aritra’s friends gathered information about the project. They collected financial records, photographs of the construction work, and copies of fund-disbursement documents. One section of the complaint referred to recommendations made by the minister’s office.

After obtaining this information, Aritra tried to contact Vrelian directly. First, he sent a letter. Later, he visited the minister’s office. Each time, he was told that the minister was busy.

One day, while waiting in the reception area, Aritra met a man named Raivik Pal. Raivik had once been involved in organizing activities for a student organization. Now he introduced himself as an influential figure responsible for political liaison at the minister’s office.

Raivik called Aritra aside and said, “You’re still thinking about the old days. Politics has changed.”

Aritra asked, “Has politics changed, or have people’s intentions changed?”

Raivik smiled faintly. “You won’t accomplish anything by asking that question. If you want to maintain your position in the organization, you need to understand reality.”

“Does reality mean accepting wrongdoing?”

“It’s not that simple.”

“Then tell the minister to meet with us. We’ll show him the documents.”

The smile disappeared from Raivik’s face.

“Not every allegation is true. Some people want to embarrass the government. Don’t let them influence you.”

Aritra said nothing more. He realized that Raivik was trying to discourage him rather than answer his questions.

That evening, several former student activists gathered outside the old university library. Among them were Nairav Kashen, Traimon Rudra, Selvan Dutta, and Kirvan Maitra. All of them had been involved in Vrelian’s movement at one time or another.

Nairav said, “We’ve spent years working for a man who won’t even listen to us anymore.”

Selvan added, “It’s worse than that. People are being sent to intimidate us. Last week, someone called my workplace and claimed I was involved in an anti-government conspiracy.”

Traimon placed several documents on the table.

“Look at these. The same work was billed twice under the dormitory project. The contractor’s name is the same, too.”

Kirvan examined the documents and said, “If these are genuine, the matter needs to be investigated. But we can’t reach a conclusion before verifying them.”

Aritra nodded. “Our first step is to verify the documents. Then we need to file a formal complaint. Personal anger won’t solve anything.”

Everyone agreed with him. Yet resentment had been building among them. Years of neglect, failed attempts to communicate, and political humiliation were wearing down their patience.

They did not yet know that someone else was trying to exploit their anger for his own political purposes.

## Chapter Two

### Behind the Facade of Trust

Vrelian Chowdhury’s rise in politics had inspired many young people. While attending university, he had organized a student transparency movement. Through that movement, financial irregularities at several educational institutions were exposed. Investigations were launched into corruption involving several projects, and Vrelian’s popularity among students grew.

At the time, Aritra was one of his closest collaborators. Aritra worked on the ground, collected students’ complaints, and organized meetings. Before delivering speeches, Vrelian would often review information gathered by Aritra.

At one public rally, Vrelian had said, “If any of the young people standing beside me ever comes to power, they must remember that power is a responsibility entrusted to them by the people. It is not private property.”

Aritra had stood beneath the stage and applauded.

But after Vrelian became a minister, the way his office operated began to change. Raivik Pal, a political adviser, became increasingly influential. Raivik maintained contact with various organizations and even exercised influence over decisions made in the minister’s name.

Raivik argued that governing required a firm hand. Not every allegation could be answered publicly, he said, and it was impossible to satisfy every former colleague. At first, Vrelian opposed these arguments. Gradually, however, amid administrative demands, pressure from his party, and political calculations, he began making compromises.

At one point, he had ordered an independent investigation into allegations of misconduct. Later, however, several directives issued by his office stalled the progress of investigations. It was unclear whether all those decisions had been made on his personal instructions. Some documents bore his signature, while others had been approved by officials in his office. Questions also arose about whether certain documents had been properly reviewed before being signed.

This lack of clarity made the corruption allegations even more complicated.

One afternoon, Aritra saw Vrelian’s car outside a government building. He approached the security staff and explained that he needed to speak with the minister urgently. A short time later, Vrelian emerged from the building.

Aritra called out from a distance, “Sir, I need a few minutes of your time.”

Vrelian stopped, looking surprised. “Aritra? What are you doing here?”

“I’ve been trying to contact you for a long time.”

“What is it?”

“There have been irregularities in the dormitory project. We have documents. The investigation results haven’t been released, and your office has also been mentioned.”

Vrelian looked around. Security officers and officials were standing nearby.

“We can’t discuss this here,” he said. “Submit a written complaint.”

“I already did. I haven’t received an answer.”

“I’ll look into it.”

“We’ve been hearing that for months.”

Vrelian’s expression hardened. “Do you think running a government is easy? Investigating every allegation takes time.”

“An investigation may take time. But how can an investigation proceed if the documents disappear?”

Vrelian remained silent for a moment. Then he said, “Submit everything you have through the proper channels. Pressuring me personally won’t help.”

Aritra felt that the minister was avoiding the issue. He decided not to prolong the conversation.

After that encounter, Aritra’s disappointment deepened. He began to wonder whether Vrelian had truly changed or whether the people around him had isolated him from the truth.

As he searched for answers, he began listening to the wrong people.

Raivik Pal secretly contacted several former student activists. He told them that Vrelian was deliberately humiliating his old colleagues. According to Raivik, the minister had taken credit for their movement and now wanted to silence them to protect his hold on power.

Raivik never gave them the full picture. He showed them fragments of documents while withholding other sections. He added his own interpretations to certain statements. As a result, his claims sounded convincing to people who were already angry.

One night, Raivik called Aritra.

“Do you still think the minister will listen to you?”

Aritra replied, “We’re pursuing the legal process.”

“The legal process? Do you know where your complaint has ended up? The file is being held up. The very people accused of wrongdoing are controlling the investigation records.”

“How do you know that?”

“I have sources. But I can’t tell you everything.”

Aritra sounded irritated. “There’s no point in stirring people up with half a story. If you have information, share it.”

Raivik remained silent for a moment before responding.

“You still trust him. That’s your problem.”

“This isn’t about trust. It’s about evidence.”

“Then wait. One day, something will happen, and you’ll understand.”

After the call ended, Aritra sat quietly for a long time. Raivik’s words had not convinced him, but they had planted a seed of suspicion.

## Chapter Three

### From Allegations to Anger

Over the following weeks, the situation became more complicated. News outlets published new reports about the unfinished dormitory project. One report alleged that part of the allocated budget had been recorded as an expense through a company whose actual operations were unclear.

After the report was published, the minister’s office issued a statement saying the allegations would be reviewed. However, no clear announcement was made about who would be responsible for the investigation.

Aritra and his colleagues met again.

Nairav said, “We can’t stay silent anymore. If nothing happens after all these documents come to light, what will people think of us?”

Kirvan replied, “We need to protect our credibility by following the rules. The evidence must be independently verified.”

Traimon said, “You’re always talking about rules. Are the rules only for us?”

Kirvan answered calmly, “No. The rules apply to everyone—to us and to the minister.”

Aritra gathered the papers and said, “We’ll do three things. First, we’ll verify the documents. Second, we’ll file a complaint with the anti-corruption authorities. Third, we’ll make the information public. Threatening or attacking anyone is out of the question.”

Everyone accepted his decision at the time. But after the meeting, Nairav and Traimon discussed the matter privately. They believed formal complaints would accomplish nothing. In their view, the government would never take them seriously unless they responded forcefully.

When Raivik learned about this disagreement, he seized the opportunity.

He told Nairav, “Aritra is a good person, but he still thinks paperwork can solve every problem. If you keep waiting, your movement will die.”

Nairav asked, “Then what should we do?”

Raivik did not give him a direct instruction. Instead, he said, “You have to show people that you’re no longer afraid. When the minister attends his next public event, put him on the spot and demand answers. Everyone should hear your questions.”

“Will we be able to meet him?”

“That depends on you. But remember, people who hide behind their power don’t like being questioned in public.”

The words influenced Nairav. He thought that directly challenging the minister at a public event might bring attention to their cause. He did not realize that Raivik’s remarks carried a dangerous implication.

Meanwhile, Kirvan discovered important information while verifying the documents. There was a discrepancy between the date on one project invoice and the registration date of the company involved. The matter was serious, but it did not prove that the minister himself was involved in corruption. The roles of the officials who prepared the documents, the department that authorized the payments, and the contracting company needed to be examined separately.

Kirvan told Aritra, “There’s preliminary evidence of irregularities here. But we still don’t have enough information to establish the minister’s personal responsibility.”

Aritra replied, “Then we’ll publish only what we know. We won’t present assumptions as facts.”

Kirvan felt relieved. “That’s the right approach.”

They prepared a formal complaint and submitted it to the investigative agency. They also collected an acknowledgment of receipt. Then they informed the media that they wanted an impartial investigation and demanded public updates on its progress.

Even after these steps, however, tensions did not ease.

Edited photographs and incomplete documents began circulating on social media. Some posts claimed that Vrelian had stolen all the project funds. Others alleged that false cases were being filed against student activists to suppress their movement. Most of the posts had no identifiable source.

Aritra realized that rumors were spreading alongside the facts. He warned members of his organization not to share anything without verifying it.

But some angry people had already made up their minds. The distinction between an allegation and proof was becoming increasingly blurred.

## Chapter Four

### Confrontation at the Public Rally

Vrelian Chowdhury was scheduled to visit the northern outskirts of Nayashahar to inaugurate a government development project. The event was open to the public. Local residents, government officials, journalists, and political activists were expected to attend.

Aritra and his colleagues decided to attend and raise their questions peacefully. They prepared several signs bearing messages such as “Release the Dormitory Project Accounts,” “Ensure an Independent Investigation,” and “We Demand Accountability.”

Kirvan reminded everyone, “Don’t take the bait if anyone tries to provoke you. Our purpose is to get answers, not to disrupt the event.”

Aritra gave the same instructions. He hoped that Vrelian might finally listen to them in public.

On the morning of the event, security was increased throughout the area. Barricades were placed in front of the stage, and a separate area was reserved for journalists. Members of the public were directed through designated entrances.

Aritra and his colleagues stood in the assigned area and raised their signs. At first, no one stopped them. Several journalists approached and asked about their complaints. Aritra briefly explained that they had submitted financial documents to the investigative agency and were demanding a transparent inquiry.

A short time later, Vrelian arrived onstage. He began by discussing the development project, describing plans for new roads, health centers, and educational institutions. Midway through his speech, he noticed Aritra’s signs.

He paused and said, “To those who have raised questions, I want to say this: submit your complaints to the appropriate authorities. No allegation should be excluded from a lawful investigation.”

Aritra stepped forward and said, “Sir, we’ve already submitted our complaint. We even have a receipt confirming it. But we haven’t been given any information about the investigation’s progress.”

Security officers moved to stop him. Vrelian raised his hand, signaling them to wait.

“What’s your name?” he asked.

“Aritra Debnath. We worked with you during the student movement.”

Vrelian looked at him for several moments.

“I remember you. But we can’t discuss the details here. Give me the reference number for your complaint. I’ll check with the relevant department.”

Aritra replied, “We don’t just want another promise that someone will look into it. We want an independent investigation. If anyone in your office is involved, action must be taken against that person, too.”

Murmurs spread through the crowd. Some spectators applauded, while several political activists began shouting angrily.

Vrelian said, “If an official has committed misconduct, action will be taken in accordance with the law if the investigation establishes it. But no one should be declared guilty before the allegations are proven.”

Kirvan added, “We’re not declaring anyone guilty in advance. We’re asking for the investigation’s findings.”

The situation calmed somewhat. But just then, several people on the other side of the crowd began shouting. They hurled insults at Vrelian, calling him corrupt. Some of them were not members of Aritra’s organization, and their motives were unclear.

Security officers tried to disperse the crowd. Pushing and shoving broke out. A sign fell from someone’s hands, and another person climbed onto a barricade.

Aritra shouted, “Move back! Stay calm!”

But not everyone listened.

Suddenly, someone threw a bottle toward the side of the stage. It hit the ground and shattered. Security officers quickly formed a line in front of the stage, and chaos spread throughout the venue.

Officials moved to escort Vrelian to safety. Before leaving the stage, he said, “Make sure no one gets hurt. Calm everyone down.”

But the situation was already beyond his control.

Aritra realized that their peaceful protest was falling apart. He searched for Nairav and eventually spotted him at the edge of the crowd, his face red with anger.

Aritra grabbed his arm and said, “We need to leave. This isn’t our event anymore.”

Nairav pulled his arm free. “You’re always backing down!”

“I’m not backing down. I don’t want our demands to disappear behind violence.”

Nairav did not respond. He walked away in the opposite direction.

Aritra left the venue deeply disappointed. He knew that some people were trying to take their movement in a different direction. But he still had no idea that his own name would soon become connected to the events that followed.

## Chapter Five

### A Secret Plan

After the disturbance at the rally, the government announced an investigation. A review of the security arrangements began, and news outlets published a range of reports.

One report said the unrest at the rally had no direct connection to the allegations of irregularities in the dormitory project. Another claimed that resentment against the minister had been building for a long time. Some online posts alleged that opposition political groups had deliberately disrupted the event.

Amid the confusion, Raivik Pal quietly tried to strengthen his own position.

Before the rally, he had told Vrelian that a group of former student activists might deliberately cause trouble. He argued that they should be contacted to keep the situation under control. Vrelian had forbidden him from taking any harsh public action. “If someone commits a crime, take action based on evidence,” he had said. “Don’t treat political opposition as a crime.”

But Raivik used that instruction to suit his own purposes. He told some officials that the minister wanted a firm response but did not want to say so publicly. To others, he claimed that Vrelian no longer wanted any discussions with his former student activists.

In this way, he delivered different messages to different people.

Three days after the rally, Raivik summoned Nairav and Traimon to a quiet office. Two other people were present, neither of whom Aritra had met before.

Raivik said, “The government will try to blame you for what happened at the rally. They’ll attempt to weaken your movement.”

Traimon replied, “But we went there peacefully.”

“Not everyone will believe that. Now you have to do something that makes the government understand it can’t ignore you.”

Nairav asked, “What should we do?”

Raivik paused before answering.

“The minister will appear in public again. This time, you must force him to answer.”

“How?”

“That’s for you to decide.”

Raivik never gave them an explicit instruction, but his words carried a dangerous implication. He knew that angry people sometimes interpreted vague encouragement as permission.

Nairav’s desire for revenge had been growing. He believed Vrelian had deliberately betrayed them. Traimon also felt that their years of activism and sacrifice had been ignored.

Kirvan learned about their plans and objected. He told Nairav, “If you think the minister committed a crime, demand an investigation. Attacking him won’t prove your allegations. It could cause other people to suffer because of your actions.”

Nairav responded angrily, “Are you still taking his side?”

“I’m not taking anyone’s side. I’m taking the side of evidence.”

“Then don’t stand with us.”

Kirvan remained silent for a moment before saying, “I’m your friend. That’s why I’ll try to stop you if you’re heading in the wrong direction. Friendship doesn’t mean agreeing with every decision.”

After that conversation, Nairav reduced contact with him.

Aritra also heard rumors about the plan. He called Nairav and asked to meet. Nairav initially refused, but they eventually met outside an old sports complex.

Aritra said, “I’ve heard that you’re planning to do something at the minister’s next event.”

Nairav looked away. “People say all kinds of things.”

“I didn’t come here because of rumors. I want to hear it from you.”

“What will you do if you find out?”

“I’ll try to stop you.”

Nairav gave a bitter laugh. “You still think talking can change everything.”

“If people won’t listen, there’s the law. There are complaints and documents. But if we attack someone, we’ll become criminals ourselves.”

Nairav’s expression hardened.

“Don’t we have the right to question someone who sold out our dreams?”

“You have the right to question him. You don’t have the right to attack him.”

Nairav remained silent for a moment. Then he said, “Stay on your own path. Don’t get in ours.”

Aritra realized that Nairav was no longer willing to listen to reason.

That night, Aritra spoke with Kirvan. They decided to inform the appropriate authorities about the possibility of an attack. They did not know the exact time or have a complete plan, but they agreed not to conceal what they knew.

Kirvan said, “We shouldn’t present assumptions as proof. But we have a responsibility to report information about a possible threat.”

Aritra agreed.

They submitted a written warning. However, an official at the department classified it as a vague political dispute. Because there was no specific plan or direct evidence of an imminent attack, the warning was never forwarded to senior officials.

The consequences of that administrative failure would become clear within days.

## Chapter Six

### The Attack on the Minister

The incident occurred on a weekday afternoon. Vrelian Chowdhury was returning to the Secretariat after visiting a public service center. Two officials, a personal assistant, and a team of security personnel were traveling with him.

It was a busy day, and traffic was heavy. Several people had approached the minister outside the service center to explain their problems. Vrelian had listened to some of them before getting into his car.

A short time after the motorcade reached the main road, several young men stepped into its path. The security personnel signaled for the vehicles to stop. The young men were carrying papers and signs. At first, it appeared that they had come to present a demand.

But the situation changed in an instant.

One young man shouted at Vrelian to get out of the car. Another approached the door. When security personnel tried to stop them, a struggle broke out. Someone in the crowd struck the car window, leaving a crack in the glass.

Vrelian remained inside the vehicle. His personal assistant urged him to duck. Security personnel took positions around the car.

One of the attackers shouted, “Answer our questions! You betrayed us!”

Vrelian called out from inside the car, “This is not the way to talk. Everyone, step back.”

But the agitated young men ignored him. During the pushing and shoving, one security officer fell to the ground, and another was injured. Someone tried to open the car door while security personnel struggled to push the attackers away.

Within minutes, chaos spread through the area. People nearby moved to a safe distance. Some recorded videos, while others called emergency services. Members of the motorcade rushed to help.

Eventually, the security team pushed the attackers back and moved Vrelian into another vehicle. He was taken to a nearby government hospital. He had suffered an injury to his forehead, and small pieces of glass had lodged in his hand. Doctors examined him and determined that his injuries were not life-threatening, but they kept him under observation.

News of the attack spread quickly.

Television screens showed images of the damaged car. Videos of the incident circulated on social media. Some people described the attack as political revenge. Others called it an act of protest by students angered by corruption. Many insisted that even if allegations existed, no one had the right to resort to violence.

Aritra was stunned when he heard the news. He immediately called Nairav. No one answered the first few calls, and later Nairav’s phone was switched off.

Kirvan arrived and said, “Remember the warning we submitted? We need to go to the investigators now. We must tell them everything we know.”

Aritra nodded. “Yes. We won’t hide anything.”

They went to the authorities and described their recent conversations with Nairav, Traimon, and Raivik. They also explained that they had submitted an earlier warning about a possible attack and provided a copy of the document.

The investigation was assigned to Jevran Al Mukht, an experienced investigator who had handled cases involving political violence and administrative misconduct. Inspector Draivik Sen worked alongside him.

At their first briefing, Jevran said, “We won’t assume anyone is guilty because of their political affiliation. We’ll examine video footage, witness statements, medical reports, communication records, and written documents.”

Draivik added, “We need to identify those who directly participated in the attack. But if there are allegations of planning, incitement, or assistance, those will also be investigated on the basis of evidence.”

Aritra said, “We’ll cooperate with the investigation. But I want to make one thing clear: not everyone involved in the attack belongs to our organization. Some of our former colleagues may have participated, but we did not support the decision to attack him.”

Jevran recorded his statement.

“If you have any documents related to this, submit them. We’ll verify your account as well.”

Aritra realized that cooperating with the investigation would not be easy. He might have to provide information against his own friends. Still, he decided not to conceal the truth.

Vrelian, who was receiving treatment at the hospital, declined to speak to reporters. His office released only a brief statement.

It read, “If there are allegations against me, they should be resolved through an investigation. Violence cannot be an answer to any allegation. I want an impartial investigation into everyone involved in the attack.”

Many people were surprised by the statement. Some had expected the minister to respond with harsh political rhetoric. Instead, he spoke about an investigation rather than revenge.

However, his statement did not end the corruption allegations against him. If anything, the attack made it even more important to investigate those allegations.

## Chapter Seven

### The First Clues

Jevran Al Mukht began the investigation at the scene of the attack. Investigators collected footage from cameras installed in nearby stores, offices, and vehicles. They also recovered broken glass, damaged parts of the minister’s car, and other physical evidence. Statements were taken from the injured security officers.

In the first few videos, the attackers’ faces were not clearly visible. Many people in the crowd had covered their faces. Even so, investigators were able to identify a possible suspect by examining his clothing, movements, and position before the incident.

Draivik watched several videos side by side.

“This man was standing by the roadside before the car arrived,” he said. “He was talking to the others. Just before the attack began, he made a hand signal.”

Jevran asked, “Can we identify his face?”

“Not completely. But a nearby store’s camera may have captured him more clearly.”

Investigators obtained footage from the store owner. It showed the young man’s face clearly. His name was Traimon Rudra.

When they searched for Traimon, they learned that he had disappeared after the attack. Investigators visited his home and questioned his family. They said he had been anxious for several days and had repeatedly spoken to someone on the phone.

Jevran began the process of obtaining the legal authorization needed to examine Traimon’s phone records. At the same time, the team searched for the warning Aritra had submitted.

The document had indeed been received by the department. However, it had not been properly reviewed. The initial note described the matter as a “possible political disturbance; insufficient information about a specific threat.” There was no record of it being forwarded to a senior official.

Draivik said, “This isn’t just an investigation into the attack. We also need to find out why the warning wasn’t passed along.”

Jevran replied, “Yes. But administrative negligence and deliberately withholding information are not the same thing. We have to establish the difference through evidence.”

Meanwhile, Aritra and Kirvan were formally summoned to give statements. Aritra submitted messages stored on his phone, details of his conversations with Nairav, and information about his contact with Raivik.

Jevran asked, “Did Raivik Pal directly tell you to attack the minister?”

“No. He never said that directly. But he repeatedly said that we had to force the minister to answer. I suspected that something might happen because of the way he spoke. That’s why we submitted the warning.”

“Did you know that Nairav or Traimon would take part in the attack?”

“I wasn’t certain. I spoke to Nairav. He told me not to stand in their way, but he never told me the exact time or method.”

Jevran said, “We’ll compare your statement with the other evidence. Let us know if you remember anything else.”

Aritra asked, “Will you also investigate the dormitory project?”

“If the allegations are connected to the attack or to the people involved, we’ll consider that information. But the corruption allegations also require a separate investigation. Evidence from one case cannot determine the outcome of another in advance.”

Aritra felt somewhat reassured. He understood that the investigation was not simply about punishing the attackers; it was also about understanding the circumstances behind the incident.

Within days, another important clue emerged. The night before the attack, Traimon had visited a particular location. Security footage from that area showed him meeting Nairav. A third person was also with them. His face was unclear, but his clothing and movements resembled those of one of Raivik’s assistants.

Jevran said, “This is a lead, but it’s not enough to accuse someone. Clothing alone can’t establish identity. We need more information.”

Draivik began verifying the man’s identity while another team searched for Traimon. Several days later, Traimon was detained at the home of an acquaintance outside the city.

During the initial questioning, he claimed that he had gone only to protest. But the video showed him approaching the minister’s car. When investigators presented the footage, he fell silent.

Jevran said, “Denying what happened won’t change the facts. You have the right to give your account and consult a lawyer. But we want you to tell us the truth about your role.”

After a while, Traimon said, “We wanted to scare the minister. We weren’t planning to hurt him.”

“Then why did you strike the car?”

“Everything got out of control.”

“Who told you to go there?”

At first, Traimon did not answer. Eventually, he said, “Nairav told us we had to stop the minister this time. He said more people would be with us.”

“Did Raivik Pal speak with you?”

Traimon lowered his head.

“He told us to force the minister to answer publicly. But he didn’t directly tell us to attack him.”

Jevran recorded the statement. He knew that Traimon’s account could not be treated as the final word. It had to be checked against other evidence.

## Chapter Eight

### Aritra’s Difficult Decision

Nairav was still missing. His family said he had not returned home for several days, and his friends did not know where he was.

Aritra was torn. Nairav had been his friend for years. They had once worked together to defend students’ rights. Now that same friend was suspected of involvement in a serious crime.

Kirvan said, “You can try to contact him, but you must not help him escape.”

Aritra replied, “I want him to turn himself in. If he’s running away, he’s only making things worse for himself.”

Aritra sent Nairav a message:

“What happened can’t be undone. But you still have a chance to tell the truth. Cooperate with the investigation. Don’t blame others for your own mistakes.”

No reply came.

Meanwhile, the financial investigation into the dormitory project was moving forward. Independent auditors examined the accounts and found that several invoices exceeded the value of the work actually completed. Records existed for some supplies, but the evidence confirming delivery was incomplete. Money had been released in the name of one company, although that company had not actually completed its assigned portion of the work.

Investigators learned that some documents had passed through the minister’s office before the project funds were approved. However, although Vrelian’s signature appeared on some records, it had not yet been established whether he knew the details of every transaction.

The findings, once reported in the media, increased political pressure. Opposition parties demanded the minister’s resignation. Some members of the ruling party said he should be supported after the attack and that everyone should wait until the corruption investigation was complete.

Jevran tried to keep the investigation separate from political statements.

One day, after being discharged from the hospital, Vrelian agreed to speak with investigators. Jevran informed him that several documents from the dormitory project had been approved by his office.

Vrelian said, “I gave the project its initial approval. Later, officials in my office processed the documents for the release of funds. I didn’t personally review every invoice.”

Jevran asked, “Did you know that some invoices didn’t match the actual work?”

“No. But the documents being presented now raise serious concerns. If anyone in my office committed misconduct, it should be investigated.”

“Did you contact any official or witness during the investigation and ask them to change their statements?”

Vrelian looked surprised.

“No. I did nothing of the sort.”

“How much did your political adviser, Raivik Pal, know about the project?”

Vrelian thought for a moment.

“He handled political liaison. He wasn’t responsible for financial approvals. But I can’t say whether he influenced any documents.”

Jevran ended the interview. He did not accept Vrelian’s statement as unquestionable truth, but neither did he assume the minister was guilty based solely on allegations.

Vrelian himself was beginning to change. While in the hospital, he had learned that some of his former student activists were involved in the attack. The news had deeply affected him. He understood that years of distance and neglect had contributed to their anger. But he also knew that their anger did not justify an assault.

One evening, his personal assistant asked whether he intended to make another public statement.

“I will,” Vrelian replied. “But I won’t stop at condemning the attack. I must also answer the allegations against my office.”

The assistant said, “That could hurt you politically.”

Vrelian looked out the window.

“If telling the truth costs me, I’ll have to accept that cost. I spoke about accountability when I was a student. If I abandon those principles now, my old words will mean nothing.”

## Chapter Nine

### Raivik’s Mask

Investigators obtained the necessary legal authorization to examine Raivik Pal’s financial and communication records. Several of his assistants were also questioned. At first, Raivik claimed that he had merely offered political advice and had nothing to do with the attack.

Jevran said, “We’re recording your statement. However, several witnesses have said that you met with former student activists multiple times. What did you discuss at those meetings?”

Raivik replied, “They were making allegations against the minister. I advised them to remain calm.”

“Did you say that the minister had to be forced to answer?”

“People say things like that during political discussions. It doesn’t mean they’re ordering an attack.”

“We won’t decide what your words mean on our own. The evidence will determine that.”

Raivik looked uncomfortable. He realized that the investigators would not simply accept his account and move on.

Meanwhile, Draivik uncovered an important piece of information. One of Raivik’s assistants had met Nairav and Traimon on the night before the attack. Messages on the assistant’s phone showed that after the meeting, he had informed Raivik:

“They’re ready. But Aritra isn’t on board.”

Raivik had replied:

“We’ll have to proceed without Aritra. He always gets in the way.”

The messages became important evidence, but their meaning still needed to be established. Investigators had to determine what “ready” meant in that context.

Jevran summoned Raivik again and placed the messages before him.

Raivik initially said, “I didn’t know they were going to attack anyone.”

Jevran asked, “Then why did you write that you would proceed without Aritra?”

“I was talking about a political event.”

“What event?”

Raivik hesitated before answering.

“They wanted to meet with the minister. I was only helping them make contact.”

Draivik said, “According to you, you were arranging a peaceful meeting. Then why did your assistant need to tell you they were ready?”

Raivik fell silent.

Investigators compared the assistant’s statement with the phone records. The assistant admitted that he had encouraged Nairav and Traimon to become more confrontational. However, he claimed that Raivik had never directly ordered an attack. He said Raivik had merely told them, “You have to create a situation in front of the minister that he can no longer avoid.”

Meanwhile, investigators received a lead on Nairav’s whereabouts. He had taken shelter at the home of an acquaintance near a small industrial town called Kharbesht. When investigators arrived, he did not attempt to flee. He was taken into custody in accordance with the law.

During questioning, Nairav initially said, “I went there only to protest. Other people made things worse.”

But video footage showed him giving instructions to others before the attack. When investigators showed him the recording, he remained silent for a long time.

Finally, he said, “I made a decision out of anger. Raivik told us to force the minister to answer publicly. He said the government wouldn’t budge unless we responded forcefully.”

Jevran asked, “Did Raivik tell you to strike the car?”

“No. Not directly.”

“Then why did you take part in the attack?”

Nairav lowered his eyes.

“I thought that if we scared him, he would listen to us. I didn’t realize things would go that far.”

Jevran said, “The court will consider the evidence in determining whether you failed to understand the consequences or simply refused to control your anger. Your responsibility now is to tell the truth.”

Nairav looked up.

“Did Aritra testify against me?”

“Aritra told us what he knew. We also have statements from other witnesses and documentary evidence.”

Nairav was silent for a moment before speaking.

“He did the right thing. I told him to stay out of it, but I didn’t listen to what he was trying to tell me.”

The admission became an important part of the investigation. Even so, Jevran continued to verify all the evidence before reaching a conclusion about Raivik. No one would be exempt from accountability because of political influence or connections. But no accusation would be finalized solely on the basis of one person’s statement, either.

## Chapter Ten

### Two Separate Truths

The financial investigation into the dormitory project continued alongside the investigation into the attack. Some names appeared in both inquiries, but the legal responsibility for each incident was being determined separately.

Independent auditors found that part of the project funds had gone to companies connected through personal relationships to the owners of the contracting firm. Several invoices overstated the value of the work completed. Officials had approved some payments without carrying out the required checks.

An accounts officer named Servan Mallik initially denied all allegations. But after investigators presented records and bank transaction details, he admitted that senior officials had pressured him to process invoices quickly. He insisted, however, that no official had directly instructed him to create false invoices.

Investigators checked his account against the documentary evidence. They found that some invoices had been amended without any explanation for the changes. Several approvals had been processed electronically, and the system retained records showing which officials had opened, modified, or approved the documents and when they had done so.

A senior official in Vrelian Chowdhury’s office, Draiven Koral, had played an important role in releasing funds for the project. Several invoices could not have moved forward without his approval. Investigators discovered that he had approved some documents without verifying them. Evidence also showed that money had reached one of his personal accounts from a company connected to the project’s contractor.

Draiven initially claimed that the payment was compensation for consulting services. However, investigators found no reliable records of such services. He later admitted that he had concealed the payment.

Based on this information, an investigation into financial misconduct and bribery was launched against him.

Vrelian’s role, however, remained unclear. Investigators examined several documents bearing his signature. Some involved the project’s initial approval, while others were policy recommendations. He had not signed several of the documents directly authorizing payments. Nevertheless, contractors had been contacted in the name of his office.

In one email, Draiven had written, “The invoices must be processed quickly because the minister’s office has approved them.” Without other records, investigators could not establish precisely what that approval meant.

Jevran informed Vrelian that serious evidence had emerged against officials in his office. Vrelian agreed to another interview.

“Examine every document bearing my signature,” Vrelian said. “I don’t want to conceal anything.”

Jevran asked, “Did your office receive any benefits from the contracting company?”

“Not to my knowledge. But the information that has come to light should be examined.”

“Did you have any personal financial relationship with the company?”

“No.”

“Are you willing to provide all relevant documents for the investigation?”

“Yes. I’ll instruct the officials in my office to cooperate in accordance with the law. But I want the investigation to remain independent.”

Jevran said, “Your cooperation will be recorded. Your statements will still be checked against the evidence.”

Vrelian nodded. “That’s how it should be.”

At this stage, investigators reached two important conclusions. First, the attack on the minister had developed into a planned confrontation in which several former student activists had directly participated. Second, there was evidence of genuine financial irregularities in the dormitory project, but responsibility for every irregularity could not automatically be placed on the minister.

The two matters were related, but they were not the same.

Aritra understood this distinction. The hardest part for him was acknowledging that former colleagues had committed a crime while continuing to demand an investigation into irregularities within the minister’s office.

A journalist asked him, “Are you taking the minister’s side now?”

“No,” Aritra replied. “I’m not taking anyone’s side. The attack was wrong. Corruption is wrong, too. Investigating one must not be used to cover up the other. And it’s also wrong to declare someone guilty as soon as an allegation is made.”

The journalist asked, “Your friends were involved in the attack. Will you forgive them?”

Aritra answered, “Personal forgiveness and legal responsibility are two different things. They were my friends. But they must answer for what they did. If I conceal the truth because of friendship, I’ll be committing a wrong myself.”

His response sounded harsh to some people. But Aritra knew he could not remain true to his conscience if he said otherwise.

## Chapter Eleven

### On the Road to Court

Several weeks later, investigators prepared a formal charge sheet in the attack case. Video footage, witness statements, medical reports, communication records, and physical evidence from the scene were compiled.

Nairav Kashen, Traimon Rudra, and several others were charged with participating in the attack, obstructing government duties, and injuring security personnel. The allegations against each person were described separately. Anyone who had merely been present at the scene was not charged with direct participation unless there was sufficient evidence of that involvement.

A separate investigation into allegations that Raivik Pal had incited and assisted the planning of the attack was also presented to the court. Messages recovered from his assistant’s phone and witness statements were important pieces of evidence. However, each allegation against Raivik still had to be examined in court.

At the first hearing, the defense attorneys argued that their clients had gone to protest politically. Their intention, they said, had been to demand answers from the minister, not to cause serious harm.

The prosecutor argued that peaceful protest was a right, but attacking someone, damaging a vehicle, or injuring security personnel did not fall within that right. Video footage showed the specific actions of the accused.

The judge instructed both sides to present evidence according to established legal procedures. Political statements could not be used as substitutes for proof.

Meanwhile, a separate case concerning financial irregularities in the dormitory project was being prepared. Investigators were examining financial transactions, approval documents, and the accounts of the contracting company, including the role of Draiven Koral and other officials.

Vrelian had not yet been formally charged. Investigators were still verifying the records and signatures from his office. Questions had arisen about possible failures in his administrative oversight. But to establish criminal liability, they would need to determine whether he knew about the irregularities, issued any relevant instructions, or knowingly accepted unlawful benefits.

He could not be declared guilty without establishing those facts.

The provincial government announced that certain administrative decisions related to the project would be suspended until the financial investigation was completed. Preparations began to publish an independent audit report. Officials were calculating where the project funds had gone, which parts of the work remained incomplete, and how much money could be recovered.

Vrelian held a press conference and said, “I know that public confidence has been damaged because my office has been implicated. Promises alone cannot restore that confidence. The documents must be made public, the findings must be disclosed, and action must be taken against anyone whose wrongdoing is proven.”

A journalist asked, “Will you resign?”

Vrelian paused before answering.

“My responsibility should be reviewed impartially. To prevent interference with the investigation, I’ve proposed temporarily withdrawing from administrative decisions related to the project. But whether I remain in office is less important than ensuring that the investigation remains free from influence.”

Another journalist asked, “Your former student activists are calling you a traitor. What do you have to say?”

Vrelian replied, “Whether they have valid reasons for their anger should be examined. If I ignored their complaints, that was a failure on my part. But that failure does not justify an attack. Likewise, the attack does not invalidate the corruption allegations.”

The statement drew mixed reactions across the political landscape. Some said Vrelian was trying to evade responsibility. Others noted that he had at least promised to cooperate with the investigation. For the public, the crucial questions were whether the documents would actually be released and whether action would be taken against those found responsible.

## Chapter Twelve

### The Burden of Testimony

On the day he was scheduled to testify, Aritra arrived at the courthouse early. He knew his testimony would provide important information about Nairav and Traimon. He also knew he would have to acknowledge that political resentment had been building among them for a long time.

The prosecutor began by asking, “Did you know the defendants Nairav Kashen and Traimon Rudra before this incident?”

“Yes,” Aritra replied. “We worked together on students’ rights while attending university.”

“Did you know they were planning to attack the minister?”

“I suspected they might take some dangerous action, but I didn’t know the specific plan. I spoke to them and warned the authorities.”

“Did you try to stop them?”

“Yes. I told them that if they had complaints, they should pursue them through legal channels. If they attacked someone, our cause would be weakened.”

Then the defense attorney questioned Aritra.

“Were you a political supporter of Vrelian Chowdhury?”

“I was involved in his movement when we were students.”

“Are you trying to protect him now?”

“No. I’m telling the court what I know about the attack. I also support an investigation into the dormitory project, provided it is conducted on the basis of evidence.”

“Can you say that the minister was not involved in corruption?”

“No. I don’t have enough information to make that determination. I can say that we submitted the documents we had before the attack for investigation. The investigators must establish the minister’s personal responsibility based on evidence.”

The courtroom fell silent for a few moments. Aritra’s answers were straightforward, but they made his position clear. He had not declared anyone innocent in advance, nor had he denied the responsibility of his friends out of loyalty.

When Nairav testified, he initially claimed that he had only participated in a protest. But after the video footage showed his role, he admitted that he had encouraged others and moved toward the minister’s car.

The judge asked, “Did you know that your actions could injure someone?”

“I was angry at the time. I didn’t think it would happen.”

The judge replied, “Anger is an emotion, not an excuse for avoiding responsibility for your actions.”

Traimon also admitted striking the car. He claimed that he had not intended to cause serious injury to anyone. The court recorded his statement and ordered that it be considered alongside the other evidence.

During the hearing involving Raivik Pal, prosecutors presented phone messages, accounts of meetings, and testimony from his assistant. The defense argued that giving political advice was not a crime and that Raivik had never directly ordered an attack. The prosecution maintained that intentional incitement or assistance in planning an attack could create legal liability even without an explicit order.

The judge said a final decision would be made after a full assessment of the evidence. No ruling would be based on isolated statements taken out of context.

Meanwhile, Aritra’s personal life had become difficult. Some people called him a traitor because he had testified against former friends. Others accused him of taking the minister’s side. His photograph circulated on social media alongside insulting comments.

One evening, he told Kirvan, “I thought telling the truth would at least make things clear. But now everyone is interpreting it however they want.”

Kirvan replied, “Telling the truth doesn’t mean everyone will accept it. But if you had concealed the truth, you would have struggled to answer to yourself.”

Aritra sighed. “I want the dormitory project investigated, too. Everything won’t be over just because the attack case ends.”

“Exactly. Both matters need to be resolved.”

Aritra looked out the window. He remembered their university days, when they had chanted slogans together in the name of justice. Back then, they had believed that choosing the right path would be easy as long as their intentions were good. Now he understood that even good intentions could lead to bad decisions—and that many people could pay the price.

## Chapter Thirteen

### The Books Are Opened

Several months later, the independent audit report was released. It confirmed multiple irregularities in the dormitory project. Discrepancies were found between the amount of work actually completed and the amounts billed. Evidence also showed that money had been diverted through several companies. Some officials responsible for the project had approved invoices without completing the required checks.

The report specifically highlighted Draiven Koral’s role. Several invoices had been processed quickly with his approval, even though the supporting evidence for the work was incomplete. The report also included information about payments made through a company connected to him.

The government temporarily removed him from his duties. A departmental inquiry and criminal proceedings were initiated against him. Several officials from the contracting company were also charged.

Regarding Vrelian Chowdhury, the report stated that initial approval for the project had been granted through his office. Some officials in his office had cited that approval when processing invoices. However, the investigation had not found direct evidence that Vrelian personally accepted unlawful payments or knowingly approved false invoices. At the same time, the report identified deficiencies in oversight and administrative failures in ensuring progress after complaints were received.

Following the report, Vrelian publicly acknowledged his responsibility.

“The report has not found evidence that I personally received financial benefits,” he said. “But there were failures in oversight within my office, and I cannot deny that. I accept responsibility for those failures.”

He proposed rebuilding the damaged parts of the project, publishing a detailed account of the excess spending, and taking lawful steps to recover money from those responsible.

But the matter did not end with his statement. A parliamentary committee held hearings on the report. Opposition members asked why the investigation had not progressed more quickly after the complaints were received. Members of the ruling party also questioned how oversight of the officials in the minister’s office had failed.

Vrelian attended the hearings and answered the questions. He acknowledged his limitations on some matters. Regarding certain documents, he said they had not been properly presented to him. The committee also heard from the officials involved and examined the administrative records.

Ultimately, the committee recommended changes to the procedures for approving projects and releasing funds. Every invoice would have to include evidence of the work actually completed. Large payments would require an independent audit. When a complaint was filed, the complainant would have to be informed of its progress within a specified period. Neither the minister’s office nor any other political office would be allowed to withhold investigative records.

Vrelian began reconsidering whether he should remain in office. Some leaders in his party advised him not to resign. Others argued that stepping down was necessary to restore public confidence.

He eventually announced his resignation as minister of public welfare. In his resignation letter, he wrote:

“I should not evade responsibility for administrative failures in oversight and the resulting crisis of public confidence. I will continue to cooperate with the investigation and assist in implementing corrective measures.”

His resignation helped ease the political tension somewhat, but it was not a magical solution. The corruption case continued, efforts to recover project funds remained underway, and the trial over the attack had not yet concluded.

Aritra read the report and saw that some of the documents his group had provided had helped the investigation. But he also realized that not everything they had collected was accurate. Some papers were incomplete, and certain allegations lacked sufficient evidence. The independent investigation had made it possible to distinguish facts from assumptions.

He told Kirvan, “At first, we thought everything was clear. Now I understand how dangerous it is to be certain without evidence.”

Kirvan replied, “Suspicion can help start an investigation. But suspicion itself is not a verdict.”

## Chapter Fourteen

### Judgment and Responsibility

The trial over the attack took several more months to conclude. The court examined eyewitness testimony, video footage, medical reports, and statements from the accused. The defense was also given an opportunity to present its arguments.

In its ruling, the court stated that peaceful protest was a citizen’s right. Making allegations against the government or a public official was not a crime. However, physical attacks, vandalism, and obstruction of government duties could not be justified as protest.

The court found Nairav Kashen and Traimon Rudra guilty of participating in the attack. Their sentences were determined after considering their individual roles, the extent of planning, the injuries caused, and their conduct during the proceedings. Several others were also convicted where the specific charges against them had been proven. The court reached separate decisions in cases where there was insufficient evidence of direct participation.

In Raivik Pal’s case, the court found no clear evidence that he had directly ordered the attack. However, his communications, accounts of meetings, and certain messages indicated that he had influenced the former student activists with the intention of escalating the situation. The court evaluated each charge separately and ruled against him on the allegations that had been proven. The remaining allegations were not established because of insufficient evidence.

The court also directed that the injured security officers’ medical expenses and compensation be considered in accordance with the law. Steps were to be taken to recover the cost of repairing the damaged government vehicle from those held responsible.

On the day the verdict was announced, Nairav looked toward Aritra. There was more remorse than anger in his eyes. Outside the courtroom, Nairav approached him.

“You tried to stop me,” he said. “I didn’t listen.”

Aritra remained silent for a moment before replying, “You were my friend. I told the truth because I wanted to stop you.”

Nairav said, “I thought we were acting for justice. Now I understand that you can commit an injustice while claiming to fight for justice.”

Aritra replied, “I hope you learn from that realization. But the harm done to the people who were injured cannot be erased by regret alone.”

Nairav lowered his head and offered no further argument.

Meanwhile, the financial case involving the dormitory project resulted in convictions against Draiven Koral and several officials from the contracting company. The court ordered the recovery of unlawfully obtained funds, imposed fines, and handed down the applicable sentences. Some money was recovered, but the full financial loss could not be made up. Arrangements were made to complete the unfinished dormitory through a new bidding process.

The allegation that Vrelian had personally accepted unlawful payments was not proven. However, the government continued reviewing the failures in administrative oversight. Even after resigning, he was required to explain relevant documents and decisions. He cooperated with the investigation and supported recommendations for action wherever evidence against an official was found.

The outcome did not satisfy everyone. Some believed that harsher measures should have been taken. Others argued that the law had been applied properly because no one had been punished beyond what the evidence established. But one point became clear through the cases: political identity alone could neither prove someone guilty nor establish their innocence.

## Chapter Fifteen

### A New Path

After the verdicts, political tensions in Nayashahar gradually subsided. But repairing the damage caused by the dormitory project took time. The new administration restarted construction. At every stage, arrangements were made to publish photographs of the work, invoices, and audit information.

Aritra and Kirvan formed a civic monitoring group with several former student activists. The group’s purpose was to collect records of government projects, request financial information under the right-to-information law, and report irregularities to the appropriate authorities when evidence supported the allegations.

At their first meeting, they established several rules. No allegation could be published without verification. No one could be called a criminal based on personal connections or political opinions. If documents were incomplete, that fact had to be stated clearly. Any false information published by the group had to be corrected. If a member supported violence, that person would be held accountable under the group’s own rules.

Aritra said, “We can’t focus only on changing the government. We have to demand changes in how things are done. No matter which party is in power, public records and financial accounts must remain accountable to the people.”

A young member asked, “What if the authorities refuse to listen to our complaints?”

“Then we take the next lawful step. We gather information, file appeals, and seek help from the courts. We need patience, but not blind obedience. And we must never act out of anger in a way that weakens the very cause of truth.”

Kirvan added, “Our goal isn’t to humiliate anyone. Our goal is to expose evidence of wrongdoing and make institutions accountable.”

Vrelian Chowdhury was no longer a minister. He had stayed out of the public eye for a while. Later, he was invited to a discussion about administrative transparency and political accountability.

At the event, Vrelian said, “While I was in office, I thought it was impossible to answer every complaint amid administrative demands and political pressure. I understand now that failing to respond only increases suspicion. It is the government’s responsibility to release information promptly and ensure independent investigations.”

A member of the audience asked, “Do you think your former student activists were right to attack you?”

“No,” Vrelian replied. “Even if some of their allegations were true, an attack would not be justified. But we should not ignore the reasons behind their anger, either. When the distance created by those in power closes off opportunities for people to be heard, resentment grows. We need to learn from that failure.”

Another person asked, “Will you return to politics?”

Vrelian thought for a moment before answering.

“I won’t make any announcements about the future right now. What matters to me is whether I can live by the principles I have spoken about. Words alone cannot restore trust.”

After the discussion, Aritra went to speak with him. They stood face-to-face for the first time in a long while.

Vrelian said, “I’ve heard about your work. You cooperated with the investigation. Despite the accusations people made against you, you didn’t conceal information.”

Aritra replied, “I never wanted to destroy anyone personally. I wanted the truth of the allegations to be established.”

“You did the right thing. But my office could have responded to your complaints much earlier.”

“We made mistakes, too. Sometimes we allowed our anger to become more important than the facts. Some people took advantage of that anger.”

Vrelian nodded.

“When there are reasons to be angry, people should speak up. But if they hand their anger over to someone else to use, they lose control of their own decisions.”

Aritra said, “We’re now monitoring government project records. We want people to be able to access documents and track the progress of investigations when allegations arise in the future.”

“Keep doing that,” Vrelian replied. “But your group must also be accountable. Those who demand transparency must practice it themselves.”

Aritra agreed. Their former closeness did not return. But their conversation did not end in hostility. Both understood that once trust had been broken, restoring it completely was difficult. Still, it was possible to acknowledge mistakes and begin working in the right direction.

## Chapter Sixteen

### The Question That Never Ends

A year later, another public meeting was held in the administrative district of Arunbesht. This time, the agenda included the progress of government projects and the resolution of citizens’ complaints. Security was still tight, but the event was organized differently from the previous one.

Aritra was invited to speak on behalf of the civic monitoring group. He took the stage and said, “We once believed that if a leader was a good person, the system would be good, too. Later, we learned that no system can depend solely on the goodwill of one person. There must be rules, records, independent investigations, and the right of the public to ask questions.”

He continued, “Our experience has shown that ignoring complaints increases anger. But declaring someone guilty before the allegations are proven also undermines justice. Investigations require evidence. And once evidence is established, there must be the courage to act on it.”

People of different ages sat in the audience. Some were students, some government employees, some business owners, and others local residents affected by unfinished development projects.

Aritra said, “The attack on the minister taught us that directing political anger toward violence does not solve problems. Those who carried out the attack had to face the law. At the same time, the allegations of irregularities in the dormitory project came to light through an investigation. One issue was not allowed to bury the other. That is how it should be.”

After the meeting, a young man approached him.

“Do you think real change is possible in politics?”

Aritra smiled slightly.

“It’s possible, but it isn’t easy. Change doesn’t simply mean putting a new face in power. It means building a system in which even the most powerful people are required to answer questions.”

The young man asked, “And what if someone refuses to answer?”

“Then we must keep asking. We must request records, gather evidence, and use legal channels. But we must follow the rules ourselves, too.”

“Will you ever speak to Nairav again?”

Aritra remained silent for a moment. Nairav was serving his sentence. In several letters, he had admitted his mistakes. Aritra had not replied to every letter. He still remembered their friendship, but those memories were mixed with the pain of betrayal.

He said, “People must take responsibility for their mistakes. But if they acknowledge those mistakes and try to change, the possibility of speaking again doesn’t have to disappear. Forgiving someone and erasing the consequences of a crime are two different things.”

The young man nodded.

That evening, Aritra and Kirvan sat down to examine records for another project. They compared financial information published on a government website with photographs of the work carried out on the ground. The accounts for one road project appeared unclear. They did not immediately accuse anyone of corruption. Instead, they prepared a formal request for information to submit to the relevant department.

Kirvan said, “We have to start again.”

Aritra replied, “We never stopped.”

Outside, traffic moved along the streets of Arunbesht. Lights shone from the windows of government buildings. The people of the city went about their daily lives. No one knew what new allegation might emerge the following day. No one knew which official would act honestly and which might try to conceal wrongdoing behind the protection of power.

But this time, a group of young people understood that expressing anger alone was not enough. Questions had to be supported by evidence. Evidence had to be handled through legal procedures. And anyone who demanded justice had to follow the same principles in their own conduct.

The attack on Vrelian Chowdhury remained a difficult chapter in the city’s political history. A minister’s security had failed, several young people had been convicted of crimes, administrative irregularities had been exposed, and the trust of many people had been shaken.

But the lesson of the incident went beyond the fact that an attack was a crime. The deeper lesson was that citizens have the right to question those in power. The state has a duty to investigate allegations. Justice requires action when allegations are proven. And no matter how deep the anger, it does not grant permission to use violence.

Aritra had once been inspired by Vrelian’s words. Later, he had raised allegations against the minister’s office. Some of his friends had chosen the path of violence, while others had tried to remain within the law. Each of them had to bear responsibility for their own decisions.

One evening, Aritra wrote in his notebook:

“You can place your trust in a person, but justice must never depend on a single individual. Power can change hands, leaders can change, and organizations can change their names. But if the rules of accountability do not change, old injustices will return under new names.”

He closed the notebook.

The work would begin again the next day. New documents would need to be examined. New allegations would need to be verified. Mistakes would have to be corrected. Where evidence was lacking, conclusions would have to be withheld. Where evidence existed, lawful action would have to be demanded without regard to a person’s identity or position.

The case concerning the attack on the minister had ended with the court’s verdict. But the search for answers to the questions that had contributed to the incident was not over.

Because justice is not a declaration made on a single day. It is a process in which everyone—the powerful and the ordinary alike—must answer for their actions. (The End) ©️All Right Reserved by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman

24°33'58.6"N 90°41'30.4"E

My home Location ✒ https://goo.gl/maps/RoKi3ekrhkm5PAHPA , But I don't live here. Rented out to other people.

Nandail Municipality, Mymensingh, Bangladesh.

Junayedmn1@gmail.com

My Writings ✒ https://www.blogger.com/profile/11734624718328723069

702) My success in writing. (লেখালেখিতে আমার সাফল্য।) – Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman ✒ https://literatureforalljunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2023/06/702-my-success-in-writing-written-by.html

707)After the fantasy of ministry.(মন্ত্রিত্বের ফ্যান্টাসির পরে।)– Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman ✒ https://mytimemyexperiencesjunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2023/06/707after-fantasy-of-ministry-written-by.html

637)Win prizes.(পুরস্কার জিতুন।) - Written by Junayed Ashrafur ✒ https://literatureforalljunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2022/10/637win-prizes-written-by-junayed.html

667)Case against AI ChatGPT. (এআই চ্যাট জিপিটির বিরুদ্ধে মামলা।) – Written by Junayed Ashrafur Rahman ✒ https://lawforjusticejunayedmn1.blogspot.com/2023/02/667case-against-chat-gpt-written-by.html http://ow.ly/Zawy104u7kO

#Intellectualproperty #Literature #Law #Contract #Writing #Wisdom