Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
The final arguments of the defence in the Batla House encounter case began on Friday. Advocate Satish Tamta,appearing for Shahzad Ahmed,the lone accused in the case,raised questions over the contradictions in the statements given by different police officers.
Comparing the testimonies given by Head Constable Satyender Kumaran and Inspector Rahul of the Special Cell,Tamta said while Inspector Rahul had claimed that the Cell had received information on the morning of September 19,2008,the head constable in his testimony had said he had received instructions on September 18 to come to the Special Cell office to take part in the raid.
The incident happened at 11 am,but the FIR was lodged at 4 pm. What was the Special Cell doing for five hours? Tamta said.
He said the forensic laboratories had failed to identify the fingerprints lifted from the house as those of Shahzad. What proof do they have that he was there? Tamta said.
The lawyer also questioned polices claim that they had found Shahzads passport in the house.
The passport is said to have been recovered from the house,but it was seized by the IO in the case related to the blast in Karol Bagh. Why is an article recovered from one place being shown as seized in another case? Tamta said.
A team of 18 officers from the Delhi Police Special Cell had raided the fourth floor flat in the Batla House neighbourhood on September 19,2008,after reportedly receiving information that members of the Indian Mujahideen,responsible for the serial blasts in Delhi six days prior,were hiding there.
Inspector M C Sharma was killed in the shootout which ensued and two alleged terrorists were also killed.
Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram
