New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday (November 21), while observing that even Ajmal Kasab was given a fair trial in our country, indicating setting up of a courtroom inside Delhi’s Tihar Jail for the trial of Jammu and Kashmir separatist leader Yasin Malik in a kidnapping case of daughter of former Union minister Mufti Mohammad Sayeed.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih was hearing a plea filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) challenging an order of a Jammu court directing Malik be produced before it physically to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses in the kidnapping case of Mufti Mohammad Sayeed’s daughter Rubaiya Sayeed.
There were security concerns and Malik couldn’t be taken to Jammu for trial: CBI
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the CBI, told the bench that there were security concerns and Malik couldn’t be taken to Jammu for the trial in the case. He, while showing a purported photograph of Malik sharing dais with terrorist Hafiz Saeed, said that he was not an ordinary criminal.
How will cross-examination be done online, Apex Court asked CBI
“How will cross-examination in the case be done online? There is hardly any connectivity in Jammu… In our country, a fair trial was given even to Ajmal Kasab and legal assistance was given to him in the high court,” the bench remarked while asking Mehta to take instructions on the total number of witnesses in the kidnapping case and saying that it could order trial to take place inside the Tihar jail.
The bench, while noting that all the accused persons in the case had to be heard before it passes an order in the matter, also directed the CBI to amend its petition and implead all accused persons as respondents in the matter.
Malik is currently lodged in Tihar Jail serving life sentence
Malik is currently lodged in Tihar Jail serving life sentence in a terror funding case awarded by a trial court after he pleaded guilty to the charges, including those under anti-terror law Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The trial court held him guilty of various offences under the UAPA and Indian Penal Code (IPC).
