The High Court (HC) on Tuesday issued a rule seeking explanation as to why two trustee board members of North South University (NSU) should not be granted bail in a case over embezzling money in the name of buying land for the univeristy.

The bench of Justice Md Nazrul Islam Talukder and Justice Khizir Hayat issued the rule after turning down the bail pleas of  two trustees-MA Kashem and Rehana Rahman.

Advocate Sayed Ahmed Raza and Advocate Shah Monjurul Hoque appeared for the bail petitioners.

Advocate Khurshid Alam Khan appeared for the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) while Deputy Attorney General AKM Amin Uddin Manik represented the state.

On 22 May, the HC ordered Shahbagh police to arrest four NSU trustees after rejecting their anticipatory bail pleas in the case.

The other accused trustees are- Benazir Ahmed and Muhammad Shahjahan.

Read:HC: Bangladesh Railway gets 7 days more to submit report on mismanagement

On May 5, the ACC sued the chairman of the board of trustees of North South University (NSU) Azim Uddin Ahmed and five others for embezzling Tk 303.82 crore in the name of buying land for the campus.

Another accused is- Managing director of Ashalaya Housing and Developers Limited Amin Mobammad Hilali.

ACC's Deputy Director Farid Ahmed Patwar filed the case.

According to the Private University Act, 2010, the Board of Trustees is the highest governing body of a private university like North South University. According to the Memorandum of Association and Articles (Rules and Regulations) of the University, the University is a charitable, welfare oriented, non-commercial and non-profit educational institution, said the case statement.

The case states that over 9088 decimal land was bought in the name of campus development of NSU with the consent of some members of the Board of Trustees bypassing the approval of the University Syndicate, University Grants Commission and the Ministry of Education.

They later withdrew cash from the buyer through cash checks in their own names and kept FDR in their own names.

They unjustly benefited themselves by committing illegal activities through misuse of power and embezzling university and government funds, according to the case.

In carrying out such illegal activities, they have committed a punishable offense by resorting to fraud and forgery and exchanging commissions.