Navy war-room leak: Case falling apart

Last Updated: Monday, September 19, 2011, 20:40

Tags: Navy War-Room Leak, Ravi Shankaran, Virender Rana

London: The extradition case against Ravi Shankaran, the main accused in the Naval war-room leak case, appears to be falling apart as a UK court appointed cyber forensic expert has raised doubts over a secret evidence provided by Government of India.

The prosecutors had earlier presented secret evidence about an e-mail with an attachment of Sir Creek sent by Commander Virender Rana to a person called Vic Branson of Inmaty company in Belgium, which they claimed was owned by Shankaran.

These attachments they alleged had material which compromised the integrity of India.

UK's Crown Prosecution service is fighting the case on behalf of India which has sought his extradition on the charges of fraud and criminal conspiracy. His passport has been revoked.

The Judge noted that the alleged e-mail by Vic Branson to Rana, produced by the prosecution as the main evidence against Shankaran, had no date and time and an independent court approved expert has confirmed that it is not possible to create an email, type 11 words, attach 8 documents and then save it all in 2 seconds only.

Cyber forensic expert Jason Coyne has, according to the judge, stated that such an e-mail could not have been sent based on the evidence produced by Government of India.

Earlier James Lewis, representing Shankaran, pointed out that Coyne's conclusion on the e-mail in question "has completely destroyed the Indian Government's case" against Shankaran.

The Judge at the City of Westminster Magistrates' Court put off the hearing after a plea from the Crown Prosecution Service John Hardy, who sought time to consult Government of India.

The hearing about admissibility of the extradition case against Shankaran, will be held for two days from October 10, District Judge Nicholas Evans said.

The judge said the court had set apart two days - today and tomorrow - to resolve the admissibility issue.

He said he was aware of the fact that any delay means "considerable expense to Shankaran who is fighting his own case".

PTI

First Published: Monday, September 19, 2011, 20:40

Comments

Sammy - Mumbai
Where do you get your fatcs from? Why is the CBI taking so long to convict the so called accused? Are they actually proctecting the bureaucrats who are sitting free enjoying the fruits by punishing the innocent and destroying their families?

Post your Comments X
Name
Place :
Email :
Comments :

Rammy19 - Delhi
The news is wrong on following grounds 1. The expert was not court appointed by gave opinion on behalf of the defence i.e. Ravi Shankaran 2. The court has not discounted the evidence of CBI. 3. The evidence produced by CBI is the temp. intenet file recovered from the computer of one of the accused. The files shown as attached with the mail were recovered from portable storage media. 4. There is another temp. internet file which shows that the mail was indeed received and replied by Ravi Shankaran.