2008 Delhi blasts: cops plea to bring accused back rejected
23 Nov 2012 2:58 AM GMT
On Thursday, the city police was denied xpermission by a Delhi court to summon from an Ahmedabad jail an accused of the 2008 serial blast case here to give a second chance to a prosecution witness to identify them.
Additional Sessions Judge Narinder Kumar rejected the police plea to call back the alleged terrorists lodged in Sabarmati Jail, Ahmedabad to enable witness Mool Chand, in whose auto rickshaw one of the terrorists had travelled, to identify him.
Forty-year-old Mool Chand’s auto rickshaw was hired by one of the alleged terrorist to travel to Gaffar Market in Central Delhi, where a blast had occurred in his auto soon after the passenger left it leaving his baggage in it and asking him to wait for him there.
Mool Chand was earlier shown six of the 13 accused of the September 2008 serial blast on a screen via videoconferencing during the court proceeding but had failed to identify the man, who had hired his auto rickshaw. The six accused are presently lodged in Sabarmati jail in Gujarat.
Mool Chand had subsequently said he can identify the accused after seeing them in person.
At this, the prosecution made a plea that the six accused lodged in Sabarmati jail, be summoned here personally so that the prosecution witness could identify the relevant accused. The court rejected the plea saying ‘the prosecution itself had approved of the medium of recording of evidence ie securing the presence of accused lodged in Sabarmati Jail through electronic video linkage facility.’
In police argument that Chand was not comfortable with the mode of video-conferencing, the court noted, ‘It is pertinent to mention that Mool Chand did not express he was uncomfortable to identify the concerned accused via this medium when he used this medium for half an hour.’
‘Had the prosecution at the very outset said that the prsence of the accused be secured by production warrant, then things would have been otherwise,’ the court added.
He also noted that ‘the monitor on which the six accused persons were clearly visible has a screen of 29 inches, so there was no factor disturbing witness from identifying the accused.’
Arguing for the production of accused before the court, Additional Public Prosecutor Rajiv Mohan had contended that if the prayer is not allowed, it would amount to curtailing its right to lead substantive evidence.
The plea was vehemently opposed by defence counsel who said Chand had seen the accused on screen and any further opportunity to identify the said youth by calling them in person would provide an opportunity to the Special Cell of Delhi Police to tutor him to identify the concerned accused.
Thirteen suspected Indian Mujahideen militants, of which six are presently lodged in Sabarmati jail in Gujarat, are facing trial in the case.
Twenty people were killed and about a 100 injured in a series of five bomb explosions carried out in busy market areas in New Delhi on 13 September 2008.
Those accused in the case are Mohd Shakeel, Mohd Saif, Zeeshan Ahmed, Zia-ur-Rehaman, Saquib Nisar, Mohd Sadique, Kayamuddin Kapadia, Mohd Hakim, Mohd Mansoor Ashgar Peerbhoy, Mubin Kadar Sheikh, Asif Bashiruddin, Mohd Akbar Ismail Chaudhary and Shahzad Ahmed.
Additional Sessions Judge Narinder Kumar rejected the police plea to call back the alleged terrorists lodged in Sabarmati Jail, Ahmedabad to enable witness Mool Chand, in whose auto rickshaw one of the terrorists had travelled, to identify him.
Forty-year-old Mool Chand’s auto rickshaw was hired by one of the alleged terrorist to travel to Gaffar Market in Central Delhi, where a blast had occurred in his auto soon after the passenger left it leaving his baggage in it and asking him to wait for him there.
Mool Chand was earlier shown six of the 13 accused of the September 2008 serial blast on a screen via videoconferencing during the court proceeding but had failed to identify the man, who had hired his auto rickshaw. The six accused are presently lodged in Sabarmati jail in Gujarat.
Mool Chand had subsequently said he can identify the accused after seeing them in person.
At this, the prosecution made a plea that the six accused lodged in Sabarmati jail, be summoned here personally so that the prosecution witness could identify the relevant accused. The court rejected the plea saying ‘the prosecution itself had approved of the medium of recording of evidence ie securing the presence of accused lodged in Sabarmati Jail through electronic video linkage facility.’
In police argument that Chand was not comfortable with the mode of video-conferencing, the court noted, ‘It is pertinent to mention that Mool Chand did not express he was uncomfortable to identify the concerned accused via this medium when he used this medium for half an hour.’
‘Had the prosecution at the very outset said that the prsence of the accused be secured by production warrant, then things would have been otherwise,’ the court added.
He also noted that ‘the monitor on which the six accused persons were clearly visible has a screen of 29 inches, so there was no factor disturbing witness from identifying the accused.’
Arguing for the production of accused before the court, Additional Public Prosecutor Rajiv Mohan had contended that if the prayer is not allowed, it would amount to curtailing its right to lead substantive evidence.
The plea was vehemently opposed by defence counsel who said Chand had seen the accused on screen and any further opportunity to identify the said youth by calling them in person would provide an opportunity to the Special Cell of Delhi Police to tutor him to identify the concerned accused.
Thirteen suspected Indian Mujahideen militants, of which six are presently lodged in Sabarmati jail in Gujarat, are facing trial in the case.
Twenty people were killed and about a 100 injured in a series of five bomb explosions carried out in busy market areas in New Delhi on 13 September 2008.
Those accused in the case are Mohd Shakeel, Mohd Saif, Zeeshan Ahmed, Zia-ur-Rehaman, Saquib Nisar, Mohd Sadique, Kayamuddin Kapadia, Mohd Hakim, Mohd Mansoor Ashgar Peerbhoy, Mubin Kadar Sheikh, Asif Bashiruddin, Mohd Akbar Ismail Chaudhary and Shahzad Ahmed.
Next Story
