Entertainment Desk 
Actress Tanjin Tisha has been granted bail in a case filed over allegations of fraud and breach of trust involving a saree worth Tk 28,800. The court also postponed the hearing on framing charges in the case.
Tanjin Tisha appeared before Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Kamal Uddin’s court at around noon on Tuesday (September 29) and sought bail. After hearing the petition, the court granted her bail. The hearing on framing charges in the case was also scheduled for the same day.
Earlier, on August 13, Tisha surrendered before Dhaka Metropolitan Magistrate Md Jewel Rana’s court and obtained bail. Before that, on July 12, the court took the investigation report into cognizance and issued a summons ordering her to appear before the court.
According to the case documents, Tanjin Tisha allegedly took a saree worth Tk 28,800 from the online fashion page ‘Apponia’. The case alleges that although she had promised to promote the saree and make the payment, she could not be contacted later.
In 2025, Aminul Islam, administrator of the page, filed the case with the court, accusing her of fraud and breach of trust. After recording the complainant’s statement, the court directed the Detective Branch (DB) police to investigate the matter and submit a report.
After completing the investigation, the DB submitted a report to the court stating that it had found preliminary evidence supporting the allegations against Tisha. The court later took the report into cognizance and issued a summons for her appearance.
On August 13, after Tisha surrendered before the court, her lawyer Nihar Hossain Faruk sought bail on her behalf. Following the hearing, the court granted her bail that day as well.
After securing bail, Tanjin Tisha told reporters that she had neither misappropriated the saree nor committed fraud. She also claimed that the case contained several false statements.
Tisha further alleged that the complainant had used her husband’s influence to file the case against her and had threatened her in various ways. The complainant’s response to these allegations was not immediately available.
