Home Contact Us  

India - Articles

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
#3264, 21 October 2010
Tantrums that Terrorists Throw: Ajmal Kasab vs. Murugan
Radhavinod Raju
Former Director General, NIA

Ajmal Kasab has appealed before the Mumbai High Court against the death sentenced awarded to him by the trial court. The Government spent crores on the Arthur Road high security prison in Mumbai to guard this terrorist against any attempt to eliminate or save him. His cell is reported to be bullet proof and bomb proof. The State has also passed an order under section 268 of the Criminal Procedure Code that Kasab shall not be removed from the prison, having regard to the special circumstances in this case. In view of this, the High Court which decided to hear Kasab’s appeal daily from 18 October, directed the state government to provide videoconferencing facility in the court and the jail so that Kasab can attend the proceedings without being physically present. On 18 October, when the appeal was taken up in the High Court, Kasab threw, his by now well-known, tantrums by arguing with policemen and spitting on the webcam. The judges reprimanded him on his conduct. On Tuesday, he demanded that he be taken to the court to be present during the appeal hearings. The judges said that there was no requirement of law to allow Kasab to remain present during the appeal proceedings, and that if he did not want to hear them, the court cannot help it.

There are some parallels between this trial and another high profile trial which took place some time back. In the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, 26 accused had been arrested and along with twelve who had committed suicide and the three LTTE leaders, including their chief Prabhakaran, charge sheeted before the trial court. Of the 26 accused that faced charges, 25 agreed to be represented by lawyers. 10 lawyers represented these 25 accused. Murugan, the LTTE cadre who was married to Nalini, did not agree to take a lawyer to defend him. He said he will defend himself. He proved to be a shrewd defendant, cross examining all witnesses, some of them in great detail, exhibiting his knowledge in arms, explosives and intelligence operations.

The trial had started on 19 January 1994. In October 1994, Murugan boycotted the proceedings on some pretext. The trial was being conducted by a designated TADA court, and while there were provisions to conduct the trial in the absence of the accused or his lawyer, subsequently, if the accused returned to the court, he could summon the witnesses already examined to cross examine them. As there already had been a lot of delay in starting the trial due to various security related matters, and we were certain that Murugan would later join the trial proceedings and exercise his right of cross examining witnesses further delaying the trial, we filed an application in the court requesting the court’s direction to forcibly get the presence of Murugan. The court only directed the jail superintendent to produce the accused, without any instructions to use force. The jail superintendent refused to use force without specific court instructions.

We then moved the High Court of Madras against the order of the Designated Judge. A Division Bench of the High Court summoned Murugan, and explained to him the importance of his presence as he was defending himself, and that he should exercise the right of cross examination of the witnesses who would depose in the court. They further explained that by forfeiting his right to cross-examine witnesses he was losing a valuable opportunity to defend himself. But Murugan was adamant and refused to attend the court.

The High Court then pronounced a landmark order in which the Hon’ble Judges said “ The right to cross-examine a prosecution witness, thus appears to be a Constitutional safeguard against any arbitrary deprivation of life or personal liberty…When a right is afforded, a duty is cast upon the person concerned to utilise it…a person deliberately and wilfully refusing to exercise his right for appearance and cross-examination, in spite of his having been made aware of the consequences, cannot be heard at a later point of time, to contend that he had lost a valuable opportunity of cross-examining certain witnesses and hence they should be recalled and tendered for cross-examination…”

The trial then proceeded without Murugan. But as we had suspected, he returned to the Court after about 8 months, by which time, we had examined 85 witnesses. After some time, just as we had anticipated, Murugan gave a petition for recalling 20 witnesses for cross-examination. We objected vigorously and the court dismissed his petition. Murugan then sent a letter to the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as appeals against the order of the Designated Judge lay with the Apex Court. The Supreme Court took this letter as a Special Leave Petition, appointed amicus curiae to represent Murugan, and after hearing the petition, finding no merit in it, dismissed it.

The difficulty we faced in Murugan’s case was that he was not being defended by a lawyer, he was defending himself. His presence in the court was therefore important. In the case of Kasab, there is no such difficulty, as he has a lawyer to defend his case. His absence in the court, or his refusal to use the videoconferencing facility to witness the proceedings in the High Court, is therefore of no consequence to the state.

Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
IPCS Columnists
Af-Pak Diary
D Suba Chandran
Resetting Kabul-Islamabad Relations: Three Key Issues
Can Pakistan Reset its Relations with Afghanistan?
The New Afghanistan: Four Major Challenges for President Ghani
Big Picture
Prof Varun Sahni
Understanding Democracy and Diversity in J&K
When Xi Met Modi: Juxtaposing China and India
Pakistan?s Tactical Nuclear Weapons: The Inevitability of Instability

Dateline Colombo

Asanga Abeyagoonasekera.
Sri Lanka: Moving Towards a Higher Collective Outcome
The Importance of Electing the Best to our Nation's Parliament
Sri Lanka: Toward a Diaspora Re-Engagement Plan
Dateline Islamabad
Salma Malik
Pakistan's Hurt Locker: What Next?
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
India-Pakistan Relations in 2015: Through a Looking Glass
Dhaka Discourse
Prof Delwar Hossain
IPCS Forecast: Bangladesh in 2015
18th SAARC Summit: A Perspective from Bangladesh
Bangladesh in Global Forums: Diplomacy vs. Domestic Politics
Eagle Eye
Prof Chintamani Mahapatra
India-US: Significance of the Second Modi-Obama Meet
Has President Obama Turned Lame Duck?
Modi-Obama Summit: Criticism for Criticism?s Sake?

East Asia Compass
Dr Sandip Mishra
India-Japan-US Trilateral: India?s Policy for the Indo-Pacific
China-South Korea Ties: Implications for the US Pivot to Asia
Many ?Pivots to Asia?: What Does It Mean For Regional Stability?
Himalayan Frontier
Pramod Jaiswal
Nepal?s New Constitution: Instrument towards Peace or Catalyst to Conflict?
IPCS Forecast: Nepal in 2015
Constitution-making: Will Nepal Miss its Second Deadline?

Prof Shankari Sundararaman
IPCS Forecast: Southeast Asia in 2015
Indonesia's Pacific Identity: What Jakarta Must Do in West Papua
Modi in Myanmar: From ?Look East? to ?Act East?
Sushant Sareen
IPCS Forecast: Pakistan in 2015
Islamic State: Prospects in Pakistan
Pakistan: The Futility of Internationalising Kashmir

Looking East
Wasbir Hussain
Myanmar in New Delhi's Naga Riddle
China: ?Peaceful? Display of Military Might
Naga Peace Accord: Need to Reserve Euphoria
Maritime Matters
Vijay Sakhuja
Indian Ocean: Modi on a Maritime Pilgrimage
Indian Ocean: Exploring Maritime Domain Awareness
IPCS Forecast: The Indian Ocean in 2015

Nuke Street
Amb Sheelkant Sharma
US-Russia and Global Nuclear Security: Under a Frosty Spell?
India's Nuclear Capable Cruise Missile: The Nirbhay Test
India-Australia Nuclear Agreement: Bespeaking of a New Age
Red Affairs
Bibhu Prasad
Countering Left Wing Extremism: Failures within Successes
Return of the Native: CPI-Maoist in Kerala
The Rising Civilian Costs of the State-Vs-Extremists Conflict

Regional Economy
Amita Batra
India and the APEC
IPCS Forecast: South Asian Regional Integration
South Asia: Rupee Regionalisation and Intra-regional Trade Enhancement
South Asian Dialectic
PR Chari
Resuming the Indo-Pak Dialogue: Evolving a New Focus
Defence Management in India: An Agenda for Parrikar
Pakistani Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan: Implications for Asian Security

Spotlight West Asia
Amb Ranjit Gupta
Prime Minister Modi Finally Begins His Interaction with West Asia*
A Potential Indian Role in West Asia?
US-GCC Summit: More Hype than Substance
Strategic Space
Manpreet Sethi
India-Russia Nuclear Vision Statement: See that it Delivers
Global Nuclear Disarmament: The Humanitarian Consequences Route
Nasr: Dangers of Pakistan's Short Range Ballistic Missile

The Strategist
Vice Admiral Vijay Shankar
Jihadi Aggression and Nuclear Deterrence
The Blight of Ambiguity
Falun Gong: The Fear Within

OTHER REGULAR contributors
Gurmeet Kanwal
Harun ur Rashid
N Manoharan
Wasbir Hussain
Rana Banerji
N Manoharan

Ruhee Neog
Teshu Singh
Aparupa Bhattacherjee
Roomana Hukil
Aparupa Bhattacherjee


Browse by Publications

Issue Briefs 
Special Reports 
Research Papers 
Seminar Reports 
Conference Reports 

Browse by Region/Countries

East Asia 
South Asia 
Southeast Asia 
US & South Asia 

Browse by Issues

India & the world  
Naxalite Violence 
Suicide Terrorism 
Peace & Conflict Database 
Article by same Author
Samjhauta Express Blast Vs Mumbai Terror Attacks

WikiWrecks: The Kashmir Escalation Effect

WikiWrecks: Did the US Double-Cross India?

An Attack on Sufism

Y! MyWeb
Print Bookmark Email Facebook Subscribe
Year 2018
 January  February
 2017  2016  2015  2014  2013  2012  2011  2010
 2009  2008  2007  2006  2005  2004  2003  2002
 2001  2000  1999  1998  1997

The Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies (IPCS) is the premier South Asian think tank which conducts independent research on and provides an in depth analysis of conventional and non-conventional issues related to national and South Asian security including nuclear issues, disarmament, non-proliferation, weapons of mass destruction, the war on terrorism, counter terrorism , strategies security sector reforms, and armed conflict and peace processes in the region.

For those in South Asia and elsewhere, the IPCS website provides a comprehensive analysis of the happenings within India with a special focus on Jammu and Kashmir and Naxalite Violence. Our research promotes greater understanding of India's foreign policy especially India-China relations, India's relations with SAARC countries and South East Asia.

Through close interaction with leading strategic thinkers, former members of the Indian Administrative Service, the Foreign Service and the three wings of the Armed Forces - the Indian Army, Indian Navy, and Indian Air Force, - the academic community as well as the media, the IPCS has contributed considerably to the strategic discourse in India.

Subscribe to Newswire | Site Map
18, Link Road, Jungpura Extension, New Delhi 110014, INDIA.

Tel: 91-11-4100-1902    Email: officemail@ipcs.org

© Copyright 2018, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies.