The first of July 2016 was a dark night in Bangladesh’s history. In a summer filled with terror attacks, this particular attack acted as a wake up-call for the residents of Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh. Terrorists held an 11-hour siege in a restaurant called Holey Artisan Bakery, during which they held 35 hostages. Twenty-two people — most of whom were foreigners — were killed brutally, while the remaining 13 were rescued later on. 

On social media, the Islamic State group claimed responsibility for the attack. Bangladesh is not a war-torn country. Deadly terrorist attacks had never happened before, and as a result, this attack shook the country even more. 

According to a July 2 Daily Star article, the hostages who could recite verses from the Quran were spared, while the other hostages were tortured and brutally murdered. The Daily Star’s source of information was Rezaul Karim, father of Hasnat Karim, who was held hostage with his wife and two children. The siege ended when the Bangladesh army used two tanks to knock over the walls. The terrorists were killed when the army entered.

While the hostage situation was still going on, the attackers posted pictures and videos on social media, which showed gruesome images of the slaughtered victims lying on the floor in pools of blood. According to a July 15 article in Dhaka Tribune, a Bangladeshi newspaper, the doctors who carried out the autopsies on the victims said the bodies showed signs of unprecedented brutality, especially the women, including an Italian woman who was seven months pregnant. 

Tahmid Khan was also present during the hostage attack. On the night in question, according to an Oct. 3 Dhaka Tribune article, Khan had been meeting two friends that night, after he had just arrived in Dhaka. Khan is an undergraduate student at the University of Toronto, Canada. He survived the terror attack, but he was then held in police custody for the next three months as a suspect.

The terrorists responsible for the July 1 attack were five young men in their late teens and early twenties, about the same age as Khan. Three of them were from affluent backgrounds, also like Khan. These factors contributed to the police suspecting Khan.

However, the Islamic State group had posted pictures of those five men with guns in the background, but there was no such picture of Khan. Also, the gunmen had been missing for a few months, according to their friends and family, whereas Khan had not disappeared.

Hostages who were allowed to leave later told the police and the media that the gunmen had forced Khan to hold an unloaded gun before taking him upstairs to the roof. This could explain the video on Facebook showing Khan on the roof holding a gun. According to the same Oct. 3 Dhaka Tribune article, the purpose of this was to use Khan as a human shield in case police snipers wanted to shoot the attackers, as well as to show the police that they still had hostages alive. 

According to a July 8 New York Times article, immediately after the army had finished their rescue, 22-year-old Khan was grabbed by Bangladeshi police, beaten brutally and then taken into custody. He was held by law enforcement and was not allowed to be in contact with anyone.

Khan was brought before court and taken into police custody for eight days starting Aug. 4, according to an Aug. 21 Dhaka Tribune article. After this, he was placed on six-day remand but was not shown as arrested in police records.

According to an Oct. 4 Dhaka Tribune article, the chief of Dhaka Metropolitan Police told reporters that Khan had not been found to be involved in the terrorist attack. However, he also said that the investigation was not over and that if Khan were found to be involved later on, he would be arrested.  On Oct. 1, Khan was granted bail. 

However, police have charged him with not giving them information about the attackers. On Sept. 28, a police officer submitted an application to file a prosecution report against Khan under section 176 of the Bangladesh law, alleging uncooperativeness with the investigation despite repeated legal notices.

Khan seems to have just been at the wrong place at the wrong time. He survived the horrific attack, but instead of being able to go home, he was held by police, and his parents did not even know where he was after the attack. They should have been notified that police had detained their son, but instead they were left to worry about whether he was alive. 

They did not hear from him after the attack until they learned he had been detained. During this time, the police were not forthcoming about Khan’s whereabouts. Full of worry about his son’s safety, Khan’s father had to be hospitalized for about a week after a suspected heart attack, according to a July 11 Huffington Post article.

After surviving this brutal terrorist attack, Khan was unfairly detained for three months. People should realize that Khan’s treatment was unjust, and the police should be held accountable.