Premium
This is an archive article published on May 22, 2009

Prosecution wants to add ‘J&K plot’ charge

The prosecution in the Mumbai terror attack case on Thursday filed an application seeking to modify the charge of ‘waging war against...

The prosecution in the Mumbai terror attack case on Thursday filed an application seeking to modify the charge of ‘waging war against the nation’ against lone captured terrorist Ajmal Amir Kasab to include a criminal conspiracy to separate Jammu and Kashmir from India. The court,while framing the charges under Section 121 of the IPC last month,had not included the conspiracy,even as the prosecution argued that the attack formed part of a criminal plan hatched in Pakistan to liberate the state. Special Judge M L Tahaliyani has reserved the order on the application for Friday.

In the application he moved before the special court,Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam claimed,“Conspiracy is a distinct offence and it can be hatched for various objectives. During the opening address by the prosecution,it was brought to the notice of the court — on the basis of Kasab’s confession — that the conspiracy to attack Mumbai and other major cities was hatched to capture Kashmir. This objective is required to be added in the first head of charges framed.” He added,“Framing of charges is completely the court’s prerogative and the prosecution can only assist it… Capturing Kashmir was one among the various objectives and it is clear from Kasab’s confessional statement.” Defence lawyers Shahid Azmi and Abbas Kazmi opposed Nikam’s plea,saying there was no prima facie evidence to suggest that separating Kashmir from India was one of the objectives of the alleged conspiracy by the Lashkar-e-Toiba.

Contempt plea against Islam Gymkhana

Kasab’s lawyer Abbas Kazmi moved a contempt plea before the special court on Thursday,seeking to issue a notice against the Islam Gymkhana which had tried to terminate his trusteeship and membership for defending the terrorist. In his plea,he said the court had appointed him and that such practices by the Gymkhana could be construed as interference in the judiciary. The judge said the court did not have powers to issue the notice and it could only refer it to a higher court. The arguments on the plea will continue on May 25.

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement