Testimony of Md. Golam Iftekhar

My name is SI Md. Golam Iftekhar Alam. I am approximately 39 years old. My address is [redacted] Dinajpur.

I am a Police Sub-Inspector posted in the Photo and Video Analysis Department of the CID, serving as an expert. The Investigating Officer in this case sent me a USB drive (Pendrive) containing 12 videos on 11-03-2025 to determine whether the videos are AI-generated or not. The videos were sent to our office for examination. After examining the said videos, I returned the pen drive along with my opinion to the Investigating Officer on March 13, 2025. Upon examination, no evidence was found that the videos were AI-generated. The investigating officer in this case sent the pen drive to me with the descriptions and hashtag values of 12 videos. This is a certified copy of the opinion that I sent to the Investigating Officer (Exhibit 11, Pages 28-30 of the Seizure List, Bond of Custody, and Documentary Evidence). The video related to this case is at serial no. 8 of the 12 videos in the seizure list. This is my signature on the certified copy of the opinion. (Exhibit – 11/1, Page No – 27 of the volume of Seizure List and Documentary Evidence). I did not submit the original copy of the opinion because it will be submitted in another case.

This is my deposition.

Cross-Examination on behalf of Chanchal Chandra Sarker-

I have received training on AI.

I did not use the Digital Signal Processing (DSP) method during the examination.

I did not adopt the Aural Spectographic Method during the examination. However, this is not necessary for my examination.

I am an expert witness.

I used the Motion Tracking Algorithm method during the examination.

I stated without doubt that the video files related to the case are preserved in the pen drive submitted by me.

I can determine whether AI has been used in a video using specialized software. Which software is used is a state secret. I examined the pixel and resolution using software in the laboratory. (No Information on Pixel Data – 7 ZIP method). I performed video enhancement. Software is installed in our laboratory; we cannot install any software from outside here.

It is not true that we can manipulate the software.

It is not true that I avoided Raster Graphic or Vector Graphic.

It is not true that I did not conduct any examination myself.

It is not true that I do not have a correct understanding of Artificial Intelligence.

At this point, an argument started between Prosecutor Mizanul Islam and Defence counsel about asking the witness if he knows the context of the video. Mizanul Islam said he is just an examiner and having knowledge about the context may raise unnecessary bias, while Amir Hossain and the Defence counsel said it’s very normal to know the context. The judge 3 sustained Mizanul Islam’s objection.

It is not true that I gave testimony as instructed by others.

Cross-Examintation on behalf of absconding accused Habibur Rahman, MD Rashedul Islam, MD Moshiur Rahman & Tarikul Islam Bhuiyan by learned state defence counsel-

No one directly supervised me during the mentioned examination.

I do not recall the name of the Additional Superintendent of Police who assigned me the duty for the mentioned examination at this moment.

It is not true that I did not watch the video sent to me.

It is not true that I gave false testimony.