“Let me see my son before I die”: the reunion came too late

Sanjoy Kumar Barua

“Let me see my son before I die.”

For Sandhya Rani Dhar, those words were not a political demand.

They were the final request of a mother whose health was failing and whose son was behind bars.

She died on Thursday without seeing him.

Sandhya Rani, the mother of detained Hindu monk and religious leader Chinmoy Krishna Das Brahmachari, died at 9:34 a.m. at Sri Sri Pundarik Dham Ashram in Hathazari, Chattogram, according to her family.

Her son remained in detention.

Her death has cast a deeply personal dimension over a case that has already become entangled in Bangladesh’s contentious debate over minority rights, religious tensions, due process and the rule of law.

For her family, the central question was starkly simple: could a detained son be allowed to see his seriously ill mother before she died?

The family sought temporary parole for Chinmoy as Sandhya Rani’s condition deteriorated.

She also appealed to Prime Minister Tarique Rahman to see her son, according to family members.

She never did.

The contrast has resonated particularly sharply because Rahman himself returned to Bangladesh from London in December 2025 after 17 years in exile and went directly to hospital to see his critically ill mother, former prime minister Khaleda Zia.

He spent time beside her and spoke with doctors about her condition.

For Sandhya Rani, there was no comparable reunion.

Her son remained behind bars.

Her death prompted an outpouring of grief and anger among members of Bangladesh’s Hindu community, while also raising a more difficult question about the exercise of state discretion when detention collides with the most elemental bonds of family.

Sandhya Rani had recently been receiving treatment at Chattogram Maa-O-Shishu Hospital. Her family said medical tests had detected cancer and that she had become uncomfortable in hospital.

She wanted to return to Pundarik Dham, where she wished to spend her final days.

She returned to the ashram two days before her death.

Chinmoy had also spent an extended period at the religious centre before becoming a prominent Hindu religious figure and spokesperson for the Sammilita Sanatani Jagran Jote.

He was arrested in November 2024 in a sedition case.

His supporters have rejected the allegations and described the prosecution as politically motivated.

His detention has remained a politically charged issue. Protests following his arrest and violence surrounding a court appearance in Chattogram resulted in the killing of lawyer Saiful Islam Alif, further intensifying scrutiny of the case.

As the legal proceedings dragged on, Sandhya Rani followed her son’s bail hearings, family members said.

They said she remained hopeful that he would eventually be released.

That hope diminished as her health deteriorated.

The family said she suffered a stroke and later developed cardiac complications during treatment.

A family member, Ranjan Kumar Dhar, said the family had sought permission for Chinmoy to attend her funeral.

The permission came after her death.

Authorities later granted Chinmoy five hours of temporary parole to attend the funeral, according to local reports.

He was required to return to detention afterwards.

It meant that a mother and son who had failed to meet while she was alive would finally be brought together only by her death.

One Kamol Das, writing on social media, expressed the anguish felt by many of Chinmoy’s supporters.

“Chinmoy Krishna Das Brahmachari’s loving mother is no longer in this world,” Das wrote.

“For a child, and for a mother who gave birth to him, there can be no greater misfortune than not being able to meet one another at the final moment of life.”

“The state will have to answer one day,” he wrote, arguing that history would bear witness to what he described as an injustice against democracy and the rule of law.

Das also alleged that the BNP and the former interim government led by Muhammad Yunus were connected by what he described as a common approach to Chinmoy’s case.

He claimed the original case had been filed by a BNP-affiliated individual and that subsequent cases were added under the Yunus administration.

He further accused the BNP-led government of betraying Bangladesh’s Hindu community after coming to power through elections.