His deputy will represent Kasab; Nikam says trial won’t be affected.
The 26/11 trial court on Monday removed Abbas Kazmi, lawyer of Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab, after he indicated that he was likely to cross-examine all 340 “formal” witnesses.
Formal witnesses include those who claimed bodies of the victims, doctors who conducted autopsies, fire brigade personnel and surveyors who assessed damage to property.
Kazmi is “determined to consume time of the court unnecessarily and the issues are being raised only with a view to drag the trial”, first additional principal judge ML Tahaliyani observed.
Judge Tahaliyani then appointed junior lawyer KP Pawar, who was assisting Kazmi, as Kasab’s lawyer.
Kazmi left the court at about 12.30pm and had to hail a cab to leave the premises. The Z-category security, which he enjoyed till Monday, will now go to Pawar, who was appointed from the legal aid panel of the sessions court.
The judge noted that it is because of Pawar, who is fluent in Marathi, that Kazmi could understand the charge-sheet and cross-examine witnesses.
After lunch, when the court asked Pawar if he wanted to cross-examine 71 “formal” witnesses who claimed bodies of 26/11 victims, he said: “I don’t hesitate to admit the 71 affidavits.”
This means, the defence will not cross-examine the 71 witnesses.
Special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam said Kazmi’s removal “is most unfortunate. But it won’t have an adverse effect on the trial since Pawar has been assisting Kazmi from day one of the trial”.
The prosecution had filed 340 sworn affidavits of “formal” witnesses under Section 296 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
The court on Friday asked Kazmi how many formal witnesses he wanted to cross-examine and how many testimonies he wanted to admit. The court was to start with 71 witnesses who claimed bodies of the victims.
Kazmi had prepared a reply stating that all 340 witnesses are not of “formal nature”, and opposed the prosecution’s plea to take the affidavits on record.
The judge specifically asked him about the affidavits of 71 people who claimed the bodies, and tried explaining to him that “if he admits them, that category of witnesses would be eliminated from the zone of consideration”. Kazmi, however, refused to admit the witnesses.
Kazmi was then given a choice to either withdraw or be removed. When he refused to withdraw, the judge said, “You are removed. You can leave the court. Pawar be prepared to argue the case.”
Kazmi was directed to hand the case papers to Pawar.
Senior lawyer Adhik Shirodkar, who appeared in the 1993 bomb blasts case, said, “This provision (section 296) was added to avoid prolonging trial. However, whenever possible, if the defence lawyer feels that it may hurt the client or that the client can get benefit out of cross-examination, the lawyer will exercise his right to cross-examine.
This right is absolute and there is no compulsion on the lawyer to admit any document.”
But the trial court, upholding the interest of the prosecution, said, “One should not be under the wrong impression that the interest of justice means the interest of the accused only. It appears that advocate Kazmi has developed a feeling that he has become indispensable.”
The court also said that if this situation is allowed to continue “it will give a wrong signal outside the court”.
On the recommendation of Pawar, the court also summoned advocate VD More from the legal aid cell. The court is likely to decide on More’s appointment on Tuesday.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}