‘Prosecution suppressed evidence to nail Kasab’

The lawyer defending Pakistani terrorist Ajmal Kasab has alleged that the prosecution had suppressed material evidence about CCTV footages to nail him (Kasab) in the CST attack.

Last Updated: Dec 05, 2010, 11:33 AM IST

Mumbai: The lawyer defending Pakistani
terrorist Ajmal Kasab has alleged that the prosecution had
suppressed material evidence about CCTV footages to nail him
(Kasab) in the CST attack.

Kasab`s lawyer Amin Solkar told the Bombay High Court
that CCTV cameras installed at Chattrapati Shivaji Terminus,
one of the sites targeted in the 26/11 attacks, had
purportedly captured the movements of two terrorists in terror
acts but only one footage was shown to the court and the rest
was "suppressed for reasons best known to the prosecution".

Kasab has taken the defence that he was not present at
CST when it was attacked on November 26, 2008.

The High Court is hearing the arguments on
confirmation of death penalty awarded to Kasab, 23, by a
special court in May this year

Solkar on Friday pointed out to a High Court bench a
portion of evidence wherein police inspector Sandeep Kiratkar
disclosed to the trial court that there were 21 CCTV cameras
installed on the main line and 15 others on the local line
which had captured the movements of Kasab and Ismael.

Kiratkar had also told the trial court that he had
gone to the control room of CCTV where he met constable Jadhav
who said he had captured entire movements of Kasab and his
partner on CCTV. On hearing this, Kiratkar immediately
recorded their movements on a CD and sealed it.

Interestingly, Solkar argued, prosecution deferred the
examination of Kiratkar abruptly and after two days this
witness took a U-turn in the trial court by saying that the
CCTV cameras were not functioning and were under maintenance.

Footage of only one CCTV camera was shown to the court
in which faces of Kasab and Ismael were not visible. "This
reflects poorly on the conduct of prosecution and Kiratkar`s
evidence should not be believed," Solkar told justices Ranjana
Desai and R V More.

Solkar further argued that Jadhav was an important
witness and should have been examined to corroborate the
evidence of Kiratkar and also to tell the court that he had
recorded the entire movements of Kasab and Ismael but
prosecution chose not to examine him.

Therefore, Solkar argued, material evidence had been
deliberately suppressed to nail Kasab in the CST terror
attack.

Kasab`s lawyer contended that not a single witness had
been examined to prove that CCTV cameras were not functioning
at the time of terror attacks and that they were under
maintenance.

Solkar argued that Shriram Kharat, who had identified
Kasab in test identification parade, spoke in complete
contrast to other witnesses in regard to movements of Kasab
and Ismael.

Kharat, an employee of a Central Railway contractor
whose job is to lock and unlock the train compartments, had
told the court that he had seen terrorists firing at people
for 15 to 20 minutes from a distance of about 30 feet.

He also said that he saw Kasab entering the local line
section in a straight line from the main line area. The other
terrorist came to the local line from another direction (of
a taxi stand) in a semi circle.

However, Solkar said, other witnesses have said that
they saw the duo entering the local section together from the
same direction.

PTI