Seeking regular bail from the 2004 Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case, the lawyer of suspended DSP N K Amin, the lone accused left behind bars, on Friday said that he should be granted bail since “the brain behind the encounter D G Vanzara and P P Pandey are out on bail.”
Amin’s lawyer claimed that the CBI had wrongly portrayed him as the main accused whereas, as per CBI investigation, it is Vanzara who allegedly masterminded the whole case.
- Ishrat Jahan encounter: CBI court summons four accused IB officers, two challenge move
- Ishrat case: Court reserves order on bail plea of lone accused behind bars
- Muslim officer took fake oath so that he could lie: Amin in bail plea
- CBI opposes Amin’s bail plea in Ishrat case
- Ishrat case: Court summons six accused cops on July 15
- Ishrat case: Court grants permission to arrest Vanzara
Appearing for Amin, Mumbai-based lawyer Dinesh Tiwari submitted before the special CBI judge K R Upadhyay that if the facts mentioned in the CBI chargesheet are to be believed at all, it is clear that Amin is not the main accused as alleged by the CBI, but they are Vanzara and Pandey.
“Amin merely followed orders from these two accused who were higher officers,” Tiwari told the court. He also told the court that the CBI didn’t challenge any of the bail orders given to the prime accused be it Pandey, Singhal or Vanzara.
Amin, a key accused in Ishrat case, is the only accused still under arrest. The other six accused, including top IPS officers Pandey, G L Singhal and Vanzara (retired), among others, are out on bail.
The CBI has opposed Amin’s bail on the ground that he allegedly participated in the case right from the abduction of Ishrat Jahan, her friend Javed Sheikh and two Pakistani nationals, Amjadali Rana and Zeeshan Johar till their elimination.
CBI chargesheet has alleged that Amin is among the accused who was present at the scene of offence and shot at Ishrat from his service revolver. Amin is also a key accused in Sohrabuddin Sheikh encounter case in which he was granted bail last year. But soon after his release, CBI arrested him in Ishrat case.
Pointing at the loopholes of CBI chargesheet, Tiwari told the court that the encounter was genuine. He said that the CBI hadn’t produced a single direct evidence against the accused. Instead, all the witnesses implicating the accused, including Amin, are actually “accomplish” who were part of encounter.
He said that the CBI has remained silent on several important aspects of the case, including an appearance of Zeeshan Johar, one of alleged terrorists of Pakistan origin.
“From where did he land up in Intelligence Bureau (IB) custody and when. The CBI chargesheet has not mentioned a word on it. Similarly, one of the witnesses has claimed that Rajinder Kumar (one of the accused officers of IB) gave arms to place near the deceased. The CBI doesn’t say anywhere that how and from where did Kumar got this weapon. IB officials don’t keep such arms and therefore CBI should have revealed about these aspects of the case,” Tiwari said.
He added, “Even the forensic report doesn’t show that the bullets recovered by prosecution were fired from Amin’s pistol.” The arguments will be continued on Monday.