Several weak links in order convicting Shahzad Ahmed: Jamia teachers

Several weak links in order convicting Shahzad Ahmed: Jamia teachers

batla house encounter: Teachers’ association report points to ‘several unanswered questions’ and the ‘reluctance’ to dig deep,says no one could have fled from Flat 108

The Jamia Teachers Solidarity Association on Wednesday released a report on the conviction of Batla House encounter accused Shahzad Ahmad pointing to what it called were “weak links” in the judgment.

JTSA member Manisha Sethi,who has been taking up the cause of Shahzad since his arrest in 2010 said,“There are several unanswered questions in the judgment and I find there is a reluctance to answer those questions.”

The report titled “Beyond Reasonable Doubt” seeks answers on why the death of the two accused was never even investigated and why the “loopholes” were ignored.

The report raises questions on the identity of Pappu,the accused as named by Mohammad Saif who was arrested from the flat on the same day. JTSA claims that “the prosecution has absolutely failed to prove that Shahzad was indeed Pappu and has brought absolutely no evidence on record and no


witnesses in court who could testify that to Shahzad being the same as Pappu”.

Shahzad’s counsel Satish Tamta also said the presence of Shahzad in the flat was to be established and the trial court completely ignored this basic point.

The reports also refutes the prosecution’s claims that Shahzad could have fled from Flat 108 after shooting Inspector Sharma as is alleged. Tamta said,“It is impossible for him to have jumped 40 feet to the roofs of adjoining buildings and then escape unnoticed.”

With diagrams and illustrations in the report,the authors have tried to recreate the scene of the encounter explaining how it would be difficult for anyone to escape the apartment. It also states that besides an “invalid and expired” passport,no other articles belonging to Shahzad were found in flat number 108 of L-18.

JTSA has taken strong exception to the fact that the additional public prosecutor,while explaining the lack of independent local witnesses,said,“Majority of the resident of that area are followers of the same religion as was of those suspects. If the police officers tried to involve any such resident,it would have created social unrest in that area,causing fear to the life of those police persons ever.”

The report says that such a “blatantly communal plea reflects the institutional bias of the investigating agencies”.

Sethi said that the defence witnesses are entitled to equal treatment as that of the prosecution but “any document or witness by way of proof of innocence of Shahzad was ignored”.