Kasab's trial could drag on for 5 years
Ujjwal Nikam says it could drag on for at least five years with Ajmal's lawyer refusing to admit any of the documents submitted by the prosecution.
Special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam had said the 26/11 trial would be wrapped up in four to five months. Now he says it could drag on for at least five years with Abbas Kazmi, lawyer for Mohammed Ajmal Amir Kasab, refusing to admit any of the documents submitted by the prosecution.
“I was hoping the trial would be over in four months,” Nikam said. “But with the defence not admitting any documents, I am pretty sure the trial will take at least five years to finish.”
Nikam had earlier told the court that he would examine about 100 witnesses. But with the defence not admitting the prosecution’s documents, he will have to examine around 400 witnesses now, he said. The prosecution has submitted 1,350 documents in the court.
Defending his stand, Kazmi said: “In most sessions [court] cases, the defence doesn’t admit documents. In the Parliament terror attack case, the Supreme Court said the amicus curiae appearing for Afzal Guru wrongly admitted certain incriminating documents. I don’t want some document to boomerang on us at a later stage.”
Nikam said the same thing had happened in the 1993 serial blasts case trial, which dragged on for 12 years. “The defence didn’t admit a single document and we examined even victims’ relatives to prove that people had died in the blasts,” he said.
In the 26/11 trial, Nikam had issued a notice under section 294 of the CrPC calling upon the defence to allow or deny admission of 83 documents pertaining to the encounter of terrorist Abu Ismail at Chowpatty.
Kazmi told the court on Friday that he would not admit any document.
Nikam argued: “Kazmi has been appointed at the cost of the public exchequer. A panchnama of sealing of the uniform of slain police officer Tukaram Ombale, for instance, cannot be injurious to him [Ajmal]. I am constrained to say that there is a D2 tactic at play — that of derailment and delay of trial.”
Judge ML Tahilyani then tried to reason with Kazmi that some of the documents were not against Ajmal. “You have to work in the interests of the trial,” the judge said.
When Kazmi didn’t budge, the judge asked Nikam if he had any witnesses ready. Sub-inspector Bhaskar Kadam from the Lamington Road police station became the first witness to have been examined in the trial.
“I was hoping the trial would be over in four months,” Nikam said. “But with the defence not admitting any documents, I am pretty sure the trial will take at least five years to finish.”
Nikam had earlier told the court that he would examine about 100 witnesses. But with the defence not admitting the prosecution’s documents, he will have to examine around 400 witnesses now, he said. The prosecution has submitted 1,350 documents in the court.
Defending his stand, Kazmi said: “In most sessions [court] cases, the defence doesn’t admit documents. In the Parliament terror attack case, the Supreme Court said the amicus curiae appearing for Afzal Guru wrongly admitted certain incriminating documents. I don’t want some document to boomerang on us at a later stage.”
Nikam said the same thing had happened in the 1993 serial blasts case trial, which dragged on for 12 years. “The defence didn’t admit a single document and we examined even victims’ relatives to prove that people had died in the blasts,” he said.
In the 26/11 trial, Nikam had issued a notice under section 294 of the CrPC calling upon the defence to allow or deny admission of 83 documents pertaining to the encounter of terrorist Abu Ismail at Chowpatty.
Kazmi told the court on Friday that he would not admit any document.
Nikam argued: “Kazmi has been appointed at the cost of the public exchequer. A panchnama of sealing of the uniform of slain police officer Tukaram Ombale, for instance, cannot be injurious to him [Ajmal]. I am constrained to say that there is a D2 tactic at play — that of derailment and delay of trial.”
Judge ML Tahilyani then tried to reason with Kazmi that some of the documents were not against Ajmal. “You have to work in the interests of the trial,” the judge said.
When Kazmi didn’t budge, the judge asked Nikam if he had any witnesses ready. Sub-inspector Bhaskar Kadam from the Lamington Road police station became the first witness to have been examined in the trial.