Yakub Memon was cool and calculative, says ex-justice Pramod D Kode

In a conversation with dna, former justice Pramod D Kode, who presided over the special Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (TADA) court which sentenced 1993 Mumbai blasts convict Yakub Memon to death, reacted to the Supreme Court order rejecting the review petition of his death penalty filed by Memon."This is indeed justice to those who suffered immensely. The acts committed by the terrorists, of which Yakub is one of the prime conspirators, have been dealt with by the courts.As I recollect, the evidence at the trial has established that he was arrested by the investigating agency. No iota of evidence has been brought forward to support his claim that he had surrendered. Apart from this, evidence regarding the events does not reveal that he had left Mumbai for his so-called reasons; on the contrary, it reveals that he had left the country for well-designed reasons.The police found a big safe in the garage of Al-Husseini building containing valuables; who would leave them behind in that way? Further, the family has remained silent or given vague replies as to where and with whom they stayed in Dubai, and how Pakistani passports, permits and identity cards with different names were found on them.The manner of operations indicates that heavy expenses were incurred. New cars were purchased amounting to approximately Rs22 lakh. These were used in planting explosives or ferrying the accused. Around 60 people were sent to Pakistan via Dubai though flights, they were put up in lavish hotels. All these expenses were routed through accounts operated by the Memon family in Mumbai. Family accounts of the Memons show big transactions before the blasts. Many co-accused in their confessional statements have said that money was distributed on the instruction of Yakub. The confessions of co-accused, evidence of approver, and other evidence have shown that Yakub was not only involved in a conspiracy but was a key conspirator.He was calm, cool and calculative during the entire trial, except his outburst (at the time of sentencing), and only he would be able to say whether that was also calculated. It is not unheard for an accused person to raise a hue and cry after he finds that prosecution has been able to prove his guilt and he is to receive a sentence. The outburst may be a ploy to garner sympathy as the media will surely highlight this act.—As told to Mustafa Plumber